The Presence and Perception of Lysenkoism and Michurinist Biology
CEU eTD Collection A thesis submitted to the Department of Ato Department the submitted thesis The The presence and perception of and Lysenkoism Michurinist biology the at Genetic Institute Geneticof HungarianInstitute the Academy of Sciences, 1948–1966 Central European University Degree of Master Science Tamás SZABÓ Budapest July, 2014 Environmental Sciences Policyand in fulfilment part of the of CEU eTD Collection University. availablefromHead theDepartment the of Environmentalof Policy,and Sciences Central European is place take may exploitation and disclosures which under conditions the on information Further University, Budapest. 1948–1966. Sciences, of Academy Hungarian the of tute T.Szabó, 2014. (3) University, the of permission written which will prescribe the terms conditions and of any suchagreement. the without parties third by use for available made be not may contrary,and the to agreement prior any to EuropeanUniversity, Central subject the in vested (2) withdance suchinstructions may made be not without of the Author. the writing) permission (in accor in made copies of process) any (by copies Further made. copies such any of part form must page Tis Librarian. the from obtained be may Details rights: Library. University European Central the property in lodged Authorand the by instructionsgiven with accordance in only made be may extracts, of or intellectual of ownership (1) the and copyright on Notes Te ownership of any intellectual property rights which may be described in this thesis is thesis this in described be may which rights property intellectual any of ownership Te full, in either process) any Author.(by the Copies with rests thesis this of text in Copyright For reference and this purposes referred thesis bibliographic be should to as: Te presence and perception of Lysenkoism of perception and presence Te theatGenetic InstiMichurinist and biology ii Master of Science thesis, Central EuropeanCentral thesis, Science of Master - -
CEU eTD Collection another degree or qualificationanother degree of this any or other otheruniversity or institute of learning. application for an of support in submitted been has thesis this in referredto workthe of Noportion declaration Author’s iii Tamás Szabó
CEU eTD Collection nity, Keywords: the naturesubordination to the of nity interaction the and humans; of role prox contextmerging contents; and the works of Latour, Lewontin and Levins, and courses, of science) and politics society; and humans organisms; and (environment Michurinistbiology. 196 and 1948 tific” Sciences of Academy Hungarian the of of midst his controversial1948, in matters agricultural Soviet in power supreme gained Lysenko D. T. agronomist Afer Hungarian Academy 1948–1966 of Sciences, the Institute of Genetic the at Michurinistbiology Lysenkoism and of perception and presence Te of Masterfor the entitled: degree and of Science Tamás SZABÓ OF THESIS ABSTRACT ofen still prevailing, yet false yet ofen still prevailing, I In my thesis, imately imately is uncovered is pus discourse analysis discourse t ist found that operating though with diferent set a representativea is drawn image h untilh this biology, genetics,agriculture,science,politics, pseudoscience, Lysenko, biology, socialism, the same same the
Michurinist biology centralized 6, Lysenko’s hwteetn,adand extent, the show I to understandthe ,
stress
B stance in their relationships toward the natural and social environment; the environment; social and natural the toward relationships their in stance y y ing
analyzing analyzing
purging of modern genetics and evolutionary biology evolutionary and genetics modern of purging CENTRAL EUROPEAN UNIVERSITY EUROPEAN CENTRAL fall in1964-65. fall
the idea the submittedby: historical contingency; their idea of neutral inthe science
w archival sources through sources archival of a conscious a of history of plantresearch ofgenetic history will; will; as of ardently exported to satellite states,includingHungary.satellite to ardently exported politics and science. science. and politics about inexplicably inexplicably devoid of of devoid h the the emphasizing novdinvolved iv perceived ly political and historical historical and political design seemed to resist the the resist to seemed
interpenetration s Month Year and July, of submission: 2014. of cetss scientists’ closed closed
ed
interrelated order of things. Te same underlying underlying same Te a science that science a isin of society society of sole sole concepts service of society.service at the G perception and conceptions of of conceptions with with ideological, “ ideological, , both discourses both, share self- mutual constitutiveness.
T enetic Institute th h Prometheanm , , the refection, refection, is of Lysenkoism and Lysenkoism of the Genetic InstituteGenetic the e attitude of of attitude rival scientific dis scientific rival
collective collective interpreted pseudoscien relationships promoting between making; e moder moder n, and n, Inthe using a p - - - - -
CEU eTD Collection Hay; and Béla Novák Béla and Hay; for their helpsupport. and thank to like would I Acknowledgements my supervisor, supervisor, my Guntra Aistara; GuntraAistara; v Zsófia Szatmári-Margitai; Ádám Fülöp; Diána Fülöp; Szatmári-Margitai; Ádám
CEU eTD Collection 5. Findings 4. Literature Review 3. Teoretical Framework 2. Methodology 1. Introduction Contents of Table 5.2. RQ2: How were the environment by plant organismsscientists? conceptualized and politics infuence and plant research? genetic 5.1. RQ1: How ideology did 4.5. Conclusion 4.4. Critique 4.3. Complex explanations… 4.2. Enter history opinion4.1. Tepopular interpenetration, contingency; Dialectics, mutual3.2. Lewontin Levins: and constitutiveness 3.1. context Latour: Black merging boxes, contents and inthe science making, 5.1.9. Conclusion critique: Scientization and and Discourses 5.1.8. Afer 1966; one-time a and reminder switch from5.1.7. 1965-66: ‘Lysenkoist “Te genetics’ considerably will be difficult” 5.1.6. Tecomparative materialism dialectical of the early sixties Restoration5.1.5. Te1958 Genetic Debate: 5.1.4. 1956: “We are liberated from the oppression of dogmatism” 5.1.3. Tedissenting turning and voices point of 1953-54 5.1.2. Teestablishment and inthethe early fifies; Institute 5.1.1. Introduction; summary short a of history and 4.4.2. Telack of humans society and 4.4.1. Telack of environment organisms and 4.3.1. … And their details 4.1.2. dogma A political 4.1.1. Neo-Lamarckian pseudoscience 5.2.1. Introduction 5.1.7.2. “Tis fight of worldviews fight didnot restrict 5.1.7.2. “Tis any biologist” 5.1.7.1. Critique 5.1.4.1. Critique ...... vi ...... 49 49 45 44 42 41 40 38 35 33 32 31 29 28 28 28 26 24 23 22 21 20 18 17 16 16 16 13 10 10 5 1 CEU eTD Collection 7. References 6. Conclusion 7.2. Archival Sources 7.1. Academic Literature 6.6. Summary Outlook and 6.5. RQ3: What the was role of humans inthe natural environment? society and social and 6.4. RQ2: How were the environment by plant organismsscientists? conceptualized and politics infuence and plant research? genetic 6.3. RQ1: How ideology did 19486.2. Summary 1966 and ofbetween plant at of the the genetics GI history 6.1. Motivation, objectives,research overview questions, aims, methodological and 5.3. RQ3: What the was role of humans inthe natural environment? society and social and 5.3.8. Conclusion outlook and inthe making history and 5.3.7. Legibility; Modernism:5.3.6. High Tepoint of convergence 5.3.5. Modernity communism: as Teultimate subordination of nature to humans controlling humansnature5.3.4. Designing society; and Man5.3.3. Gramsci: isthe ensemble relations, of social the conqueror of material forces 5.3.2. Living the 11th thesis 5.3.1. Introduction 5.2.5. Conclusion outlook and 5.2.4. Tegeneticists’ side 5.2.3. Terestoration of the early sixties 5.2.2. Teinauguration of the early fifies ...... vii ...... 72 70 70 69 67 67 65 65 64 64 61 60 60 59 58 57 56 56 56 54 53 51 49 CEU eTD Collection Table 2.2. Classification ofarchival sources in this studyused Table 2.1. Archival sources used Tables of List in this study ...... viii ...... 9 6 CEU eTD Collection 2 1 over. was called, in time lost the for by replaced were denied, he function least at or tence ward anticipated this, Inof spite humble hundred were ings Hungary, to came he when year that so yet, not culturalist disappear denly eradicatingmodern genetic surface the spell thattime, Lysenkoof out fallen already has Lamarck’s his Trofim Lysenko Denisovich agronomist Soviet the 1960, 25, January On 1 . . Introduction theory on the inheritancetheory of acquired characteristics, Te netics. ically Amasino Vernalizationthe is vernalization experiments vernalization In 1965, 1965, In by some by embarrassment … biologist and reduce usin ercie uigtepeiu as days. previous the during received he questions afraid. afraid. that phasize the answer to aspects many in me than more know love, great little. very know I multiple Hungaryit timesthathave in I duringsaid I life, whole my , ardently exported ardently 2 I. V. I. efect turned efect gave a speech at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences Sciences of HungarianAcademy the at speech a gave he 2004, 2554). 2554). 2004, simple man when he began simple man when began he , Stalin himself, died in 1953. 1953. in died himself, Stalin , twelve inexplicably gained gained inexplicably the speed of grain production the of speed grain compared to the meticulous process of Jean Baptiste-Lamarck( Jean
( Sándor Igali Igali Sándor Michurin, Michurin, Lysenko 1960, from from
rapidly rapidly developing agriculture agriculture developing “acquisition or acceleration of the ability to fower by a chilling treatment” (Chouard quoted intreatment” quoted (Chouardchilling a fowerby to ability the “acquisitionof acceleration or I literally prepared for this speech the whole night, and I I and night, whole the speech this for prepared literally I year numerous questionnumerous among among Lysenkothat claimed such [and] then the f [and] a against itself. Te audience was listening to the familiar phraseology itself. listening was Teaudience toagainst phraseology the familiar I am sure that that sure am I s dvancing modern dvancingmodern afer the discovery discovery the afer as the only biology and genetics. and biology only the as s; s; , , (2002) 1-2 his his and the living the 1 and various other biological practices, reminiscent of Jean-Baptiste of reminiscent practices, biological other various and ) mission was to to was mission sometimes having enormous , , 1744 a Lysenko finally and and finally Lysenko the comrades gathered here, who welcome Soviet comrades comrades Soviet welcome who here, gathered comrades the then contemporary thencontemporary s
raised , iasco iasco while – talking 1829 to to grace on behalf of the Academy of Sciences of Academy the of behalf on genetics, and genetics, Nevertheless,
became evident.”became ) is generally known for for known generally is ) inherited, therefore properties be can vernalization dramatwould political ensur positioning his school of thought, named afer horti afer named thought, of school his positioning of the structure of the DNA, a substance whose exis whose substance a DNA, the of structure the of : for a satellite state of the Soviet Union Soviet the of state satellite a preach some more by answering the more th more the answering by more some preach once once . … … . 1 which e the food security; security; food I promise to you that I I that you to promise I
infuence in Soviet agriculture Soviet in infuence afer his great patron, great his afer curious Darwin and his followers his and evidence. did notDarwin find
Soviet agriculture was was agriculture Soviet irrevocably fell out of favor. of out fell irrevocably scientist, during the years years the during e He,
Nonetheless, Nonetheless,
luck to see see to luck however, (HAS) (HAS) basing evolution o evolution basing have striven to learn, and I feel thathave feel strivenI learn, and to
drew diferent conclusionsdrew the “Lysenko afair,” as it is ofen “Lysenkois afair,” the it as am still still will use every efort i efort every use will selective breeding informed by ge made the impression of a of impression the made in front of a full house. house. full a of front in (1898–1976) his time was soon up but up soon was time his his scientific his enemies trembl since the the since . … … . believed to be under his be to believed I would like to em to like would I keen on on keen ing n natural laws, and and laws, natural a bit, I am still am I bit, a where his teach his where
late by systemically by H with such with , famous for famous ,
is teachings is to make up make to thirties n order n in a : “ : n n - awk
sud T , , two on By he his ------
CEU eTD Collection Findings, each question will receive its own own its receive will question each Findings, Findings and Review Literature subsequent Te 196 drawn. be could ontology far, Accordingly 196and search ciet the Union Soviet the afected statements,communication, personal internal and records, of,thereforeneed 1948 from waythe the time education(I academic to positions institutional through books from place took purge official same ings power, supreme the by banned formally was Morgan and Mendel B ut b ut bid. y 6 start In my thesis, by analyzing archiv analyzing by thesis, my In Terefore, my Terefore, ; and and ; both in the Soviet Union and outside of it in the the in it of outside and Union Soviet the in both ) ). ). ack in 1949, t 1949, in ack at . Nevertheless,the 6 3. 2. 1. 2. 1. t was the
through he investigation he politics and and politics , I propose three three propose I , h w h biology b the and HAS GI b
GI, geneticist, biochemist, plant physiologist physiologist biochemist,plant geneticist, y examining the plant scientists’ personal perception of Lysenkoism and Michurinist and Lysenkoism of perception personal scientists’ plant the examining y y ow did ow w hat the was role of humans
examining the extent of extent the examining enormous enormous
controversial of because aim to understand understand to aim two objectives: two ere to he year year he ideology and and ideology 1965, 1965,
the environment science which, in turn, turn, in which, science provocatively named Genetic Institute (GI) of the the of Institute Genetic provocatively (GI) named
at the the at energy energy eersac usin questions research Tese afer the infamous VASKhNIL session VASKhNILsession infamous the afer while engaged in, among other things, plant breeding research, a field in field research,a plantbreeding otherthings, among in, engaged while interrelated way the GI conceived theway environment conceived the GI epistemological epistemological politics infuence was was the history of plant genetic research research genetic plant of history the lsucssources al s and organismsand the the pent in in pent and society society and research questions questions research it, it, presence of Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology at the at biology Michurinist Lysenkoismand of presence sub modern knowledge. genetic altered frenetic excitement o excitement frenetic chapter, will will 2 never before researched before never foundations foundations plant oitSoviet in the natural environment? social and r h olwn.following. the are be be
Barna Győrfy the direction of Hungarian Hungarian of direction the conceptualized conceptualized satellite states including Hungary, where the Hungary,where including states satellite and beyond beyond and interpreted
genetic genetic I intend to intend to I omns at,Party, Communist that through which an implicit implicit an which through , contrary to most research done so done research most to contrary , research where modern genetics based on based genetics modern where
, through these question these through
and organisms; and n actual results, they will be sup be will they results, actual apparently by show how this infuence frominfuence this how show propagating Lysenko’s propagating teach plant uigti eidperiod this During ? , including programmatic including at the GI the at HAS, HAS, scientists and Lysenko rose to rose Lysenko and
resisted whose director director whose plant humans so and
between 1948 between ? the push genetic discursive s. In my In s. (1948– re all at - - - -
CEU eTD Collection in time. latertheir and plans,research for GI the of case the ten o cultural reality molded; it. plan tionship of human means inthe history ronment political social, concrete, be will ronment, ment. descriptive tics environment the what Lysenkowith grammatic statements, internal suchas the debates and environment the of lens the however,through told, be would history Tis Michurinistbiology. Lysenkoism and of infuence the tists brief refections and analyses my by plemented n plant n mentioned mentioned , will deal with the history of the GI, the changes in its operations,inits thechanges policies, theGI, of withthehistory deal will , and science, the topic of the third research question and and question research third the of topic the science, and t t T first Te T T T T T presentation of science he reader will understand not only how plant plant understandreaderhow will only he not he he he reader he he e
sub o genetics, genetics, second second will third sub will deal with concrete and abstract concepts of of concepts abstract and concrete with deal will f all the the all f level, level, chapterw of the first first the of chapter w chapter be drawn. Tere drawn. be ism ism sub
and last last and informed by politics, neutrality neutrality or or will will sub as as descriptive chapter, regarding the the regarding chapter, and Michurinist biology, but also to grasp a more theoretical, philosophical idea of idea philosophical theoretical, more a grasp to also but Michurinist and biology, will deal with how scien how with deal will scientific responsibility, so that an image of how people engage with “their” envi “their” with engage people how of image an that so responsibility, scientific things that afect afect that things through the the through there chapter, regarding the role of of role the chapter, regarding understand how the particular dynamics of the environment the of dynamics particular the how understand the contents of ill ill and organisms and ill sub lead to the next one by asking whereasking humans by one in are next the to lead s will edt h etoeb sighwta oeo uasi is humans of role that how asking by one next the to lead ub of science. science. of chapter chapter examples of how humans should act in th in act humansshould how of examples chapter was part of a larger larger a of part chapterwas be no analysis of analysis no be and organisms, and also also comparison of official programmatic statements; actual applications actual statements; programmatic official of comparison report will be will of my Findings my of t beside it I will I he w , politics politics , – se se s; ere concept environment relationship and and personal opinions, opinions, personal and
subchapters to make comprehension more practical. W practical. comprehensionmakemore to a more theoretical, philosophical analysis of whatrela thisof analysis philosophical moretheoretical, a deliver an analysis of of analysis an deliver tists s imagined to be. Tis Tis be. to imagined their biological one. their biological by highlighting and analyzing certain events and pro and events certain analyzing and highlighting by their relationship
reacted to reacted is of of is s of the environment environment the of 3 humans , regarding the the regarding , breeding and and breeding great importance, importance, great . f ive-year whole
i deology and and deology and society society and humans and and humans sub , the one of of one the , . p ideology and and ideology lans. representingprogressive sub chapter, genetics genetics infuence chapter chapter and organisms organisms and ose in the natural and social envi social naturaland the in as humans as modern politic th environment but only on the historical, the on only but humans’ research of of ose relation to already already politics, and science in science and politics, s “threatening” s environment and and ideology and and ideology civilization. live in live of the era clashed erathe of relationship and organisms and ideologies due todue ideologies deals with poli with deals hat follows, is a is follows, hat of s thatenviron plant scien plant due to their to due a social social a created and created milestones s politics . Tere . the of the with and in ------
CEU eTD Collection ogy, Teoretical Framework,ogy, Literature and Review. tory I ence, chapterFrameworktheinfusingTeoretical By withreferencesthe to politics, about of plant genetics at the GI of the period. the of GI the at genetics plant of will will demonstrateto t he reader the contingency,thereader he non-linearity, non-narrative nature of Before that, however, I will introduce my Methodol my introduce will I however, that, Before 4 society, and sci and the the his - - - CEU eTD Collection issues, and photocopying my chosen documents. documents. chosen my photocopying and issues, (Lysenko, keypeople and Barna Győrfy). ( ments to thatunderstand need I the perceptions the and Institution of people then. assumed I place, May between Floor) Ground 9. tér István Széchenyi Budapest, 1051 iomatic rules. ( period” and domain given a in thought of aries possibilities conceptualthat determinessystembound of a the define and individualsubjects of ness conscious the beneath operate that logic, and grammar of those beyond rules, by governed are ogy) Foucault’s in formations,terminol discursive or (epistemes knowledge and thought “systemsof the one in Crabtree 2006 ( time” situationand or context particular a in located are they is, Tat moment. ticular par a in interpretationsbased are Terefore,[all] process. research the from emergent are meanings selves, others the and world.” understandour we how of centralpart a is world understand the we how and are we who that such linked are investigation of object the and investigator Te know. we what from ourselves separate experientially.” and socially tively understandings through developed and the meanings with other people.” relationship and settings, social cultures, within negotiated always is know we what Tus, fuid. and at the people the for individually and uniquely meant biology Michurinist and Lysenkoism what understanding thesis, my writing and researching While 2 plant breeding and genetics, Lysenkoism, Soviet biology); Lysenkoism,genetics, and breeding plant biology); Soviet . Methodology . I was greatly assisted by head of department Diána Hay in in Hay Diána department of head by assisted greatly was I this, For is thesis my that means Tis From this perspective, “validity or truth cannot be grounded in an objective reality, [and] … [and] reality, objective an in grounded be cannot truth or “validity perspective, this From cannot we “assumes that which epistemology, subjectivist or transactional a is epistemology Its intersubjec constructed is it know we as “thatassumesreality which relativistontology, a Ithas T Michel Foucault’s is interpretivist method is based on “ on based is interpretivistmethod GI. I I ). conducted my research at the Archives of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences (H- Sciences of Academy Hungarian the of Archives the at research my conducted t hat since GI was part of HAS at th at HAS of part was GI since hat Te Archaeology of Knowledge of Archaeology Te founded on a qualitative, a on I I Archival auxiliary Béla Novák helped me in administrativein Novák Béla me helped Archivalauxiliary followed followed t he theoretical belief that reality is socially constructed socially is reality that belief theoretical he 5 Gutting Gutting While probing the the probing While an e (1969). (1969). period, it it period, interpretivist method method interpretivist 2013 th discourse analysis discourse e period (from the (fromlate period Tis discourseanalysismaintainsTis that ). Its mission is to uncover those ax those uncover to is mission Its ). my search for for search my would probably have have probably would database of the Archives, I as I Archives, the of database 7 and and
28 approac as I was interested in interested was I as . . broad, related related broad, When choosing the choosing When forties h similar to to similar h all the docu the all Cohen and Cohen to 1965);to topic the s ------
CEU eTD Collection Table 2.1. Archival sources used sources Archival Table2.1. summarize and note, handwritten 1 letters, opinion or internalreports (statementspapers missions), or 1969. and 1947 tween amount significant of yield would period certain that to restricted people key of activities the and topics such that sumed 4/2/5 Iratai Győrffy Barna 4/2/4 Iratai Győrffy Barna 4/2/1 Iratai Győrffy Barna 72/3 TudományokOsztálya Biológiai VIII. 8/9 TudományokOsztálya Biológiai VIII. 8/9 TudományokOsztálya Biológiai VIII. 8/9 TudományokOsztálya Biológiai VIII. 8/9 TudományokOsztálya Biológiai VIII. 8/3 TudományokOsztálya Biológiai VIII. 8/3 TudományokOsztálya Biológiai VIII. 5/10 TudományokOsztálya Biológiai VIII. 5/9 TudományokOsztálya Biológiai VIII. 226/4 ElnökségiIratok I collected collected I Box and folder and Box the titles 71 unique and and useful data, useful Out of the of Out types of documentstypes that The Biology Biology The Committee Biology the of meeting 1954 14, December the of Records Committee Biology the of meeting 1953 9, November the of Records Institute planMartonvásár of research 1954 the concerning 1953 September2, the of Records formation species of questions The Lysenko: T.D. research scientific planHungarian of five-year The events biological of Calendar research biological planHungarian of five-year The lecture) ( biology Michurinist of questions present The Lysenko: T.D. Lysenko T.D. academician of work the in species formationof the development of further The V.S.Dimitriev: Győ Barna development stageof theory The Genkelj: andP.A. N.A.Maksimov Debate Genetic 1958 9, October the of Records document s , 7 records of meetings or sessions, 3 typed lectures, lectures, typed 3 sessions, or meetings of records 7 , in this study this in 4 5
so as to as so se classified as other. as classified documents, reportsresolutionsor researchplans, 12 23 decrees, or rffy’s , , s Committee’s I recognized recognized I
( 542 handwritten notes on on notes handwritten enabl
. . A4 Source: pages) e me to narrow down my focus. problems and work done so far so done andwork problems I found.I 6 ten Archives of the Hungarian Academy Hungarian the of Archives
types of documents. Teredocuments.are of types out of Te following two tables tables two following Te Title meeting’s eight Lysenko’s
Darwin’s archival resolutions resolutions work teachings on on teachings boxes (Table originating from be 5 articles, articles, 5 HAS 7 7
of programmatic s 2.1 and 2.2) and 2.1 Sciences. 1950/51? 1950/51? pre. 1953 pre. 4 internal 4 1960 1952 1951 1949 1958 1954 1953 1953 Year ? ? -
CEU eTD Collection 7/4/3 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/4/1 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/3/23 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/3/22 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/3/21 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/3/17 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/3/10 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/3/8 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/2/3 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/2/3 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/2/2 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/2/2 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/2/1 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/? Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/? Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/2 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/2 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/2 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/2 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/1/6 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/1/5 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/1/4 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/1/4 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/1/3 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/1/2 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/1/2 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/1/1 Iratai Győrffy Barna 7/1/1 Iratai Győrffy Barna 4/5/5 Iratai Győrffy Barna 4/2/11 Iratai Győrffy Barna 1953 research plan research 1953 Sciences Agricultural VIII. the oftasksmain The sciences medical,andagricultural biological, between relationship the Győrffy:on Notes Barna development five-year the ofaspectsmain The the of principles general (The research biological planHungarian of five-year The Győ Barna Győ Barna plan) (Preliminary andforestry planagriculture offive-year scientific the ofproblemsmain The Győ Barna (proposal) plant breeding state,our oftasks history, The report the basedon proposalResolution Sciences Biological of Section the on F. Straub Brunó to letter Győrffy’s Barna stategenetics of the on Sciences Biological Győ Barna genetics of state the on Sciences Biological of Section the ofdraft report The years past15 the in genetics of achievements mostsignificant The animalhusbandry in genetics of education of role the Győrffy on Barna to Letter genetics fieldsof andeducation research future the on Notes plant breeding planagricultural of five-year The breeding plant anddevelopmentour of reorganization the for Proposal genetics of education the of situation the on Notes Barna debates genetic the regarding situation current The Győ Barna 1950) 24 NovemberPravda), (originally (Szabad Néprace biological of definition new The Lysenko: T.D. formation developmentspecies of creative A.N.the Studitsky: For report by Martonvásár by report 1958 the ofaspects genetic the Győrffy on Barna of notes The Department Genetics Martonvásár of work research 1957 the Győrffy on Barna of notes The Institute Research Breeding andPlant Selection Plant Győ Barna Institute Research Győ Barna Martonvásár Győ Barna plan)five-year second the oftasksmain (The research botanical planexperimental of perspective The Győrffy’s rffy’s rffy’s rffy’s rffy’s rffy’s rffy’s rffy’s rffy’s letter to Imre Biacsi on the five-year plan2. five-year the on Biacsi Imre to letter plan1. five-year the on Biacsi Imre to letter proposal the of opinion of Section the of draft report the commenton experimentation scientific ofways The lecture: plant breeding stateHungarian of the on lecture opinion on the 1954 work of the Sopronhorpács Sopronhorpács the of work 1954 the on opinion the by report 1954 the on opinion by report 1955 the halfof second the on opinion plan’s elaboration) 7 plan’s main tasks’ Department’s HAS report by the by report
Botanical
1956? 1966 1965 1965 1965 1965 1965 1949 1949 1965 1947 1965 1947 1950 1953 1959 1958 1955 1955 1954 1953 1953 1950 1950 1950 1950 1950 1965 1965 1966 CEU eTD Collection Iratai 79/4/7 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 79/4/3 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 79/4/1 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 79/4/1? Iratai Intézet Genetikai 79/4/1 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 79/3/3 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 79/2/2 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 79/2/1 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 79/1/2 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 79/1/1 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 79/1/1 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/8/3 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/8/3 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/8/? Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/8/2 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/8/2 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/8 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/5/2 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/5/1 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/5/1 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/3 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/2? Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/2? Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/2? Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/2? Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/2 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 3/1 Iratai Intézet Genetikai 7/5/1 Iratai Győrffy Barna Curriculum plan with five topics five planwith Curriculum quantitativeandqualitativechanges” biological analysisof plan” research 1963 the for sheet Topic concept” Of” Report? concept” genetic molecular the of criticism plan” research 1962 the for sheet Topic concept” genetic molecular the of criticism plan” research 1961 the for sheet Topic concept” genetic molecular the of criticism plan” research 1961 the for sheet Topic concept” genetic molecular the of criticism plan” research 1961 the for sheet? Topic the of directorate the by stategenetics of the on 14/1966. no. Resolution genetics stateof the on Sciences Biological of Section the by report The 1946-1965 micro-evolution) (without research plant genetics Hungarian research genetic domesticof achievements The Hungary in genetics of years 25 The years last15 the in genetics of progress the of achievements mostsignificant Appendix,The evolution) micro- (without research plant genetics stateHungarian of The Győ Barna Group Biological the of meeting 1956 1, June the of Records Academy Sciences of Hungarian the ofInstitute Genetic The 1939-1949 Institute Genetic the oftasks the of description The Department Genetic Institute: Agrobiological Academy Sciences of Hungarian Institute Agrobiological of creation the on Agriculture of Minister the of Decree MoA. (119.) 8.062/8/1949. The Institute Agrobiological of creation the on Hungary ofRepublic the of Government the of Decree Gov. (91.) 4.008/1949. The Sciences of Academy Hungarian the ofInstitute Genetic the of operation The 1939-1948 Institute the of history The Sárkány: Sándor Győrffy Barna by directed topics research Planned analysis of biological quantitativeandqualitativechanges” biological analysisof ” research 1964 the ofopponent the of Opinion qualitativechanges quantitativeand biological analysisof philosophical The quantitativeandqualitativechanges” biological analysisof plan” research 1964 the on report Topic quantitativeandqualitativechanges” biological analysisof plan” research 1964 the for sheet Topic rffy’s The analysis and criticism of the molecular genetic genetic molecular the of analysisandcriticism The comment on the meeting the commenton HAS 8 The philosophical philosophical The philosophical The analysisand The analysisand The analysisand The The philosophical philosophical The The analysisand The 3. 2. 1. The philosophical philosophical The 196 1951? 1950? 1959? 1960? 1964? 1965? 1956 1969 1966 1956 1956 1965 1949 1949 1948 1965 1964 1965 1963 1962 1962 1961 1960 1960 1960 1966 1966 5 ? CEU eTD Collection ensured. search toaccording the priorities of the Teoretical Framework, my and refections. and lected Institute. the “environment,” to lated “organisms,” “humans,” “society,” “ideology,” “politics,” and and pens colored making. thein history on light ing these would shed wording unique, personal dimensions: two to attention paying while analyzed and read I collection, data Afer emy study this in used sources archival of Classification 2.2. Table TOTAL Other Notes Letters Articles Lectures Records opinions Reports, documentations plans, Research Resolutions,decrees papers Programmatic Te limitations of this study study this of limitations Te of Sciences. itself ordered into the final final the into ordered , the fact that the thatthe fact the , Afer Afer Type examined the documents by hand, looking for any occurrence that is broadly re broadly is that occurrence any for looking hand, by documents the examined this, this, Forthethree researchquestions I I drafed drafed of remarks at other cases. remarksothercases. atof veracity and the representativeness the completelyand veracity be cannotsources the of the many turns ends dead of plant and ( genetics paper paper outline outline 226 originate fro originate 1 1 outlines, listing every every listingoutlines, 2 1 1 5 that them 6 1 3 1 1 8 h the Box number Box formed the basis of this paper. paper. this of basis the formed m 72 through the perspectives of my research questions, research my of perspectives the through 1 1
itrcleet events historical time constraints; and and constraints; time 9 While writing my thesis, I assumed thatassumedwritingcompar I thesis, myWhile 5 1 4 4 and and 29 14 4 2 1 2 1 5 7 the . . Source: Source: 16 entry that I found. Tese then were were then Tese found. thatI entry 3 2 8 3 3 factual history reetlk ouet,documents, event-like or 11 10 79 1 Archives of the Hungarian Acad Hungarian the of Archives the nature of the archival re archival the of nature the TOTAL 71 23 12 5 1 4 5 3 7 4 7 , I used used I , T biological biological his process was was process and the history of history the and four science) and science)
diferently n and done the se - - - - -
CEU eTD Collection 3 more or depending on less ofcertainty the ofcertainty a a next sentence that takes it up” “ on,”and later debates of sequence forethe“ peace, world; the about ideas working of build-up as well, as science of conse united less and quence.” firm less obvious, less closed, less other some to leading premise packaged on later others, by so made ( on later biases and fuences science puts outputs. and of logic internal the standing complex investigates He understand how Latour book, seminal his In CONTENTS 3.1. ogy geneticist ologist, tour’s theoreticallar framework, at ology Lysenkoismperception and presenceof the evaluate and Michurinist and bi analyze to In thesis; my 3 Ibid., . Teoretical. Framewor Tis book unfortunatelyTis book numbers, lacks page therefore them. omitted Ialso U L Latour’s Latour’s
nder the Influence Science in Action in Science 25) 25) i ATOUR n other words, other n is created is createdis is the the Even though he writes about scientific publications, this thought is applicable to the whole the to applicable is thought publications, scientific this about writes he Eventhough and and fate of thefate statement, of thatfiction, whether a or about depends fact a a the decision is on is it notes about scientificabout literature: “ notes GI, GI, ( e Ibid., ntangled in other theories and ap and theories other in ntangled B : how how regarding the relationship of ideology and politics, and science; and politics, and ideology relationshipof the regarding hypotheses turn into the facts, A common example for box black a isa Richard LACK 21) 21) simpler eventually all eventually science black boxed. boxed. black
(1987) (2007) fundamental approach stems from the realization that understanding how understanding that realization the from stems approach fundamental
. You make it more of a fact if you insert it as a closed, obvious, firm and firm obvious, closed, a as it insert you if fact a of more Youit make . a a Lewontin’s BOXES . . before the black boxes close and become black black become and boxes close black the before set of set k can can Realizing that eventually all accepted scientific facts are black boxes, he boxes, black are facts scientific accepted all eventually that Realizing (1987) them them ,
by Richard Lewontin and along with along be ; interconnected scientific facts or machinery get black boxed; that is, being too being is, that boxed; black get machinery or facts scientific afer a while a afer conceptualized as an ever an as conceptualized follows scientists and engineers engineers and scientists follows Tis means that science is a collective process process collective a is science that means Tis SCIENCE the status of a statement depends on later statements later on depends statement a of status the
Biology as Ideology Ideology as Biology the chapterthe “ By itself a given sentence is neither a fact nor a fction; it is it fction; a fact nor neithera is sentence given itselfa By and
n IN
, and and , into machines or build-ups are only possible possible only are build-ups p 10 thoughts lications
THE draw a box around it, and tend tend and it, around box a draw A Reasonable Skepticism” Reasonable A
mathematical ecologist (1995), computer , MAKING
based on on based scientists and engineers abandon under abandon engineers and scientists -improving production, a continuous a production, -improving 3 and and other , or, the of climate fact change. ; sociologist of science of sociologist through history history through MERGING variousotherchapters in small parts than looking for social in social forthan looking i f their their f I will use a particu a use will I Richard
in in CONTEXT (Ibid. of bases evolutionary bi evolutionary a larger whole. larger a only only and society society and ( , 29), there 29), , Ibid. . It is made is It . are kept in kept are Levins Bruno to the in the to , 27).,
AND Biol . La to ------
CEU eTD Collection 4 search formistakes, the showcasing errors, of the bility Scienscience. longer no is timewhen a it be might chinery; or process delineated a ent, are, they accepted and old how matter no that workings. about ignorant us keep to boxes black of nature the is it if even making, the in always many with process a is science before, mentioned newl with partly old, with for something mediates reality social the that ing knowthat only tive can truth truth, we throughyet th filters ter tend book. inhis world the toward ontology, even maybe and epistemology, relativist mate texte du dehors en rien a that“thereoutside no is philosopher constructionist constructions. mental alike, opinions and facts of relativity subjectivity,plurality,and that claims constructivism which social postmodern of and science epistemology and tology Fromthese in the “material,” the making this medium invisible. What invisible.What medium making this For the textualist radical approach, cf. ever-uncertain but I Tis theoretical position relativizes science, since now it is no longer seen as a a as seen longer no is it now since relativizes science, position theoretical Tis When Tus, t is worth notingworth is t : : Latour’s “ its whole mission of producing absolute knowledge about the material world is based on on based is world material the about knowledge absolute producing of mission whole its true we can, at least intellectually,least at can, we t “development.” B he whole of Latour’s arguments presume a soci Latour’s a presumeof arguments whole he a hypothesis becomes becomes hypothesis a reality,”thestate “how of things y being being y foundational thoughts, thoughts, foundational niyentity thought, not thought, not 4 or “objective” or apparently out of historical and cultural context cultural and historical of out
Tis stance typically results from a misunderstanding or mistranslation of mistranslationof misunderstandingor a from results typically stance Tis now now just - , that “there is nothing outside the text.” the outside nothing is “there that , text.”Mostproponents postmodern of thought We can see the past, present, and possible future of a scientific fact or ma or fact scientific a of future possible and present, past, We the see can y no longer questioned longer no that, just cetdbae,biases, accepted Jacques Jacques
solid blocks blocks solid
is truth and truthand contrary to a first reading, first a to contrary . a a
scientific fact, scientists or engineers engineers scientists or fact, scientific Where Are You?: of the Cell An Ontology Phone it is is it Derrida’s accept society now now actually actually reality, but before us, humans. Terefore this social reality humans.social Terefore us, this before reality, but in a clean form form clean a in carved out of one thing one of out carved really that there was a time when it was not science, and thereand thatscience, not there was time when it a was possible to outline Latour’s theoretical Latour’s theoretical outline to possible famous famous ec h the hence . they are still still are they public public 11 parts. happens are” actors, factors, and and factors, actors, tists we can never know the world, that there is only is thatthere world, the know never can we is mediation. Tis is why science is is why science Tisis mediation. is
for us; us; for actually 1967 1967 shamingfellowscientists, of apparent is is o , the from
cultural truth or reality reality or truth cultural Latour is not an advocate of the the of advocate an not Latouris that the hypothesis is is hypothesisthatthe u sas but composed assertion that that assertion as a medium, medium, a as knowth and invi Te latter indeed suggests an ulti an suggests indeed latter Te , , science or law-like facts are only are law-likefacts or science an ever-expanding an they keep us us keep they objective reality; reality; objective contingency. s of of blt.ibility. at science tend to to tend understood it to mean mean to understood it (2014) by (2014) Maurizio Ferraris. a multitude of of multitude a it difers fromthatdifers it objec that Latour does not in not does Latour that il n'y a pas de hors-texte de pas a n'y il Tis means that, as I as that, means Tis unconsciously away from awayfrom is based on falsifia on based is black boxed partly boxed black S quantized, that is,thatquantized, cientific facts are cientificfacts situated right af right situated and and outlook there is a wish a is there , directionless , the debunk in themak in very difer very their realizing extreme , or on or , inner
agree i l n'y de a ------,
CEU eTD Collection structures; such as whole and parts, environment and organism, and so on; can be explained in a in explained be can on; so and organism, and environment parts, and whole as such structures; ( struments tempt of the box black to boxed black are things when only is It structure of DNA the discussing When box. black a of creation the before rated der, matter no how small that disavow or themedium, conceal this. through facts consciousness”is always inthe making, the also are be, might they matterhuman howprimeval no arguments, since values, such for place no there is yet correct, or good is future the wrong, or bad is past the usually Ten, context political and cultural, historical, of denial the is that then one, “internal” an furthermore, “development,” and a of thispart the authors between race is a the and readers to control each and place. first the in people most out force internal, high its discriminativeof standards,“ th false of ing lack of in the case ofin thescientific case literature, When some people, usually usually people, some When As to to As reality,inLatourtoNotwithstanding, according thatTerefore, historicistis see a atit lookingfrom science perspective, can we filtered through that sociocultural medium. Saying therefore, that science “develops” indicates “develops” science that therefore, Saying medium. sociocultural that through filtered the thinking thinking the together. contentfuse and context structure underinvestigation. chemical Here again very the of parcel and part arewordscompetitor’s these queer student. a structureHowever,the to submitted isas probing, long as every by learned and known is structure the once least at case the is Tis structure. molecule a scribing “Suspense,” “game,” “tone,” “delay publication,” of “awe,”“six common are not delay” words de for weeks the black boxing of statements into tacit knowledge, then incorporation of that into in into that of incorporation then knowledge, tacit into statements of boxing black the historical thesis Ibid. eories , 44), or more generally, generally, more or 44), , , claim claim , constantly changing, yet we can only arrive at discovering natural laws or scientific or laws naturaldiscovering at arrive only can we yet constantlychanging, quoting Claiming that science is a separate, independent, objective entity is the the is entity objective independent, separate, a is science that Claiming just a day or hour before accepted as truth. truth. as accepted before hour or day a just that that refection and s since many“external” reality.infuence the social things of medium and contingency, in other words, the existence and nature of black box black of nature and existence the words, other in contingency, and the contrary, science has “development” “development” has science appear neutral,appear without contingency, strong inone word: ( words privileged privileged usually done those with conficts of any interests interests any of conficts with those from Watson foresight. that whatever the this convincing is“not just matter a of throwing words about. It by society, by ” ” society may be. society how the fusion of context and contents, and other similar other and contents, and context of fusion the how Forcing people out is what is called convincing in science, in convincing called is what is out people Forcing in order to i , he he , t is hard to popularise science because it is designed to designed is hardis it sciencepopularise tot because 12 that knowledge and its context separate in an at an in separate context its and knowledge that ( Ibid. presumes presumes ( Ibid. state have of the does science world be, might It isdone , 6), sustain , 5) , writes other’s a a , , contextcontentsand cannot sepa be Latour ( Latour
value value the interests thepresentof or social exciting out of for fear : moves” ( in Latour’s in as we will see later in th in later see will we as diference between two states, two between diference Ibid.
discovery of the molecular the of discovery Ibid. , 52) notes that that notes 52) , one’s historicist historicist , 58)., continuously and Ibid.
passing. , 13)., T approach, he “socialhe efort to efort because e main e -
es - - - - .
CEU eTD Collection takes time and money, and so is guided by and directed bythoseintheforces directed worldby and takes that timemoney, and have guided is socontrol and inwhich we live.”society the from derive that predispositions by infuenced deeply all investigation,scientific are of out come that results scientific so-called the even problems, those investigating in uses it that ideas the with, deals science that problems Te institutions. social other our all of structure the by infuenced and ing professing terms, these of associations political direct the of most of ogy.” thattechnolto and science the theconceptionsview positivismof integrateditsof ofand capitalism interactions,” mechanical and causalities simple constitutivenessthan rather Young(19 of words the in presumes, which structure thought tics to thesis. this in discussed things the on view nor faults, out with or best the is approachthat this suggest to like would I do nor whole, a materialism as alectical background. Marxist dialecti applying of way particular one represent only (they) he vertheless, Ne dialectics. simply or materialism dialectical dialectics, materialist dialectics, Marxist including Lewontin’s CONSTITUTIVENESS L 3.2. aware of their own contingency. in gage Latour While them. Levins and environment(Lewontin the of Lewontin. at look way, us applied let more science as a a as science Terefore, instead of starting out from political motivations, political from out starting of instead Terefore, But But Lewontin Hence, EWONTIN self-proclaimed dialectical arguments in my Findings, and see how up. hold they arguments inmy see and self-proclaimed dialectical Findings, the the above this this above a a ( making making sort and and when referringtomy approach, that the ( 1995) 1995) productive of also
AND simultaneous oneness diference. and level of of Levins’ gives a historicist overview of science in the making, Lewontin and Levins en Levins and Lewontin making, the in science of overview historicist a gives While being aware the consequent limitations, I do not intend to criticize di criticize to intend not do I limitations, consequent the aware being While very early very that science, and while preaching about contingency, they themselves are also are themselves contingency,they about preaching while and science, that L apparent , “ , EVINS science is molded by society because it is a human productive activity that humanactivity productive a is it because society by molded is science activity, activity, ) approach : D : gives gives
partiality toward materialism, as opposed to idealism, idealism, to toward opposed materialism, as partiality IALECTICS and as such, such, as and the has been called diferent names even by himself (themselves),himself diferentby even names called been has position of science within society and culture by by culture and society within science of position It He 2007 I will usewill“dialectics” I throughout inthis will be an be will , along with Levins, also writes about the socialization the writesabout also Levins, with along , ; CONTINGENCY 13 it is “a social institution completely integrated into integrated institutioncompletely “asocial is it b , 37) which is the main main the is which 37) ,
interesting and focus on the the on focus and 78 ;
), “ ), attempt,however,dialec apply to INTERPENETRATION nedt to intend I interpenetrations and mutual and interpenetrations link between Latour and Latour between link c thought c as movement of thought of movement “analternativeworld use the underlying the use thesis informed by by informed representsmy ,
MUTUAL consider to get rid get to a ------
CEU eTD Collection of black box black of phenomenon. diferent? stead of very in are they way the things are Why diferent? bit little a of instead are they way the things are Why fundamental questions: two ask we processes, to objects from focus our change we When process. of Moreover,t Tat stresses wayscience whatSo of making dialectical isa science? provides definition a dialectics: for holistically. world the treat is do can we best the and essence, the lose inevitably we because parts into down anything break to trying in use no this,]there in is that indissolublewhole murder weworldan engaged [Forthe of as people dissect. to Te is untenable: world, theunderstanding complete of a providing in fails science of view religion, ing historicaldominant at each epoch.” views values of and society time. and over money Afer replaclegitimatingthe discussing chief howduring became forcesociety inscience history Identifying system, processesof a the opposing popular alternative is popular science is supposed to apply itself. which to problems the solving from us prevent natureand of understanding rich a prevent they end, the nature.In interactionin of richness full the seeing from us entrepreneurialprevent individualist one, tive that one mi gies, ideolo Both isolation. in studied be can thathavethatproperties and isolated be can that pieces and bits of up made is world the level every at that view dominant, currently but incorrect, equally the with nor whole indissoluble an as neither world entire the sees that one view, third a construct to is problem Te a We clock. like think it is clock. a is world the that did, Descartes as think, longer We metaphor. no a is it that forgotten have we Wethe worldthat thatatomistictheof to with originatedDescartes machine view used so have become low its persistence those and that eventually transform it. (Lewontin 2007 Levins and al that processes opposing the identify to is systems understand to way Rather,the principle. ganizing or universal any of absence the (4) determination; reciprocal their and whole, and part of equality cal ontologi the (3) dynamics; and origins own its with each societies, and ecosystems, organisms, as such ( 1) the historically contingent nature of wholes; (2) the qualitative diferences among kinds of wholes of kinds among diferences qualitative the (2) wholes; of naturecontingent historically the 1) h es then giving examples where (part and whole, cause and efect) the current mainstreamcurrent the efect) and cause whole, and (part where examples giving then ey ey , , Tinking dialectically dialectically Tinking in other words, being able to switch between diferent temporal temporal diferent between switch to able being words, other in (2007 ” d ” rr In summary,“a is it supremely institution, social refectingreinforcing and the , 187) 187) , ors the premodern feudal social world, and the otherthatthe mi and world, social premodernthe feudal ors
to “ to go back to nature and the good old ways, … to return to a description a return to to … ways, old good the natureand to back go emphasize emphasize then, then, processes more than things, “ things, than more processes is t o be aware aware be o ” ” Finally, he outlines the problem and and problem the outlines he Finally, 14 and thand of of e se two questions two se the simultaneously the regarding things as snapshots as things regarding he rr
above above concludes that concludes ors the modern competimodernthe ors open and closed state closed and open c and methodological and , 128) , allude to the sametheto allude simultaneously this view this - - -
- -
- -
CEU eTD Collection 5 Michurinist biology subject and neously entity objective dent, that say to anymore possible not is it that and ogy environment the of idea particular Michurinistbiology temptto historicalics of all change transhistoric one no history, thereis and time ticular par and concreteown constellation its with sociocultural particular a in locus particular own its has refection and sis parts. these. to adhere to that ence fails neglected be otherwise to perspectives, Cf. When looking at the interface ideology and politics, and science, science, and politics, and ideology interface the at looking When T Let us see in the Literature Review now, how others perceived and analyzed Lysenkoism and Lysenkoism analyzed and perceived others how now, Review Literature the in see us Let Dolphijn, van and der Tuin 2012. is approach is is politics politics take up a pre-black box, process-based dialectical perspective i perspective dialectical process-based pre-blackbox, a takeup and and 5 is neglected inconventional isneglected thought. is not is speed up time or or time up speed somehow mustsomehowhave penetrated science. especially especially the penetration itself; penetrationthe itself; worldwide at the GI the at a lone on the long run long the on ” ( is no more, more, no is Fracchia Lewontin and efective
where, as I presumedmy I throughinterconnected where, as questions,research a . In my Findings, I will continuously refer back to these in the analythe in continuously these to will referback InI Findings,my slow slow and organisms and , since, as a summary,“ a as since, , it down down it there is nothing that could be “penetrated.” be could that nothing is there . . Such principles principles Such the the they idea that the interaction assigns the roles of the object the thatof interaction theidea roles the assigns “penetrated science,” since “science” as an indepen an as “science” science,”“penetratedsince in order not to miss important important miss to not order in 15 , a , 2007, 276). n image of humans and society, as well as as well as society, and humans of image n al law or generality that can explain the dynam the explain thatcan generality or law al Myassumption much thathappenedso is it can can [ also also b ] ecause ecause be be utilized in a a in utilized every historical phenomenon historical every I I n the case of Lysenkoism of case theand n believe it is pertinent to to pertinent is it believe events which would which events critique
S cience simulta cience of any sci any of ideol at ------
CEU eTD Collection [with] a philosophical program [based on] Lamarckism. … … Lamarckism. on] [based program philosophical a [with] whole, coherent how Lysenko by Prezent, assisted was ner in belief upon primarily premised “ Jean-BaptisteLamarck. “ characteristics acquired inheritance of to were come across. is easy ogy T 4.1.1. Neo-Lamarckian T 4.1. and ferent form Introduction the in outlined questions research three my narrative through literary biology? in taken th afair:” senko before interpreted me people how gaps in with find “Lyto this the Literature is the true goal Review no is goal scientificthe evaluate merits of derstand and LysenkoismMichurinist and biolog barefoot biology? Michurinist Lysenkoismand T 4 … Lysenko wielded absolute authority in Soviet biology to promote his agricultural techniques, agricultural his promote to biology Soviet in authority absolute wielded Lysenko … of theories discredited already the on cards of house a built Michurin colleague his and Lysenko . . he still prevailing, general mainstream general opinion stillprevailing, he questionsimplestto he Literature Review (2003, (2003, “ It turns out thatthe this isnot correctquestion, reasons. for Firstly,two is my goal Firstly, rendering this by perspective diferent a use I if possible only is gaps those finding Nevertheless, ideology and and ideology HE peasant scientist, peasant or ruthless a careerist? political this review is: What was the the was What is: review this
r POPULAR even to completelyunderstand to even thehistorical 179 . . they I will look for theoccurrence look willI the “environment of ) briefy mentionsbriefy ) Lysenko“infamous leader.” neo-Lamarckian an as must have have must ose Russian science historian Mark Popovsky Popovsky Mark historian science Russian politics, and science” inthe and politics, broadest where sense leadme. to they see promising omissions. omissions. promising
OPINION ” pseudoscience
A very similar description is of of description is similar very A describe had had something to do with Jean-Baptiste Lamarck and his theory o theory his and Jean-Baptiste Lamarck with do to something th ‘Lamarckism,’ e e an ambitious,an main question main perception or it is simply pseudosciencesimply is it or Who was this man? A man? this was Who Terefore, a better formulation to to formulation better a Terefore, or the inheritance of acquired characteristics.” acquired of inheritance the or of of 16 of the rise and fall of Lysenko of fall and rise the of “cunning philosopher,” into ideas to his develop a others of othersof of this of events de All suchareinliterature.All implied J ong-Lambert’s writes Literature Review would be: What What be: would LiteratureReview [Te Soviet regime Soviet [Te whatLysenkoism Michurinist and biol n evil n . Tese are unnecessary burdens, unnecessary myare Tese as . and organismsand : “ : . . charlatan, a a charlatan, Prezent set about providing him providing about set Prezent Nabham
( 2007 ,” “humans society,” and (2009, (2009, describe ism cunning already] demanded already] , , y; 1 and secondly, myand ), ), and Michurinist and When discussingWhen in a slightly dif slightly a in 463 wh
neither the direction the o ) ) magician, a magician,
writes writes writes to un n were
Flit that that the - - - - -
CEU eTD Collection a n oiia uhrt” (olHne 08 6) Dobzhansky 168). 2008, (Roll-Hansen authority” political and cal Lysenko’s of ideologi falsity truthby or science the overriding the not of but stake was claims, at sue ( Organization Cultural and Scientific example, an As Krementsov and Lambert (2012, 378) summarize ology Lysenkoism Secondly, 4.1.2. the mystical with it to core,triedthe and people to feed Lysenkoism,Igali, perienced Sándor senko’s fending Lysenko, ( ‘contemptible selection; natural Darwinian and inheritance Mendelian of sis knownDobzhansky; for Teodosius ogist this in terpreted to public eral Dunn,C. “… Lysenko’s due was to the of Lamarckism, popularity appeal the of the and tendency gen Lamarck done how be it could indicated scientists that Ibid. Turning Miklós Müller, afer giving a brief memorial of Lysenko’s 1960 speech at the HAS, finishes finishes HAS, the at Lysenko’s speech of memorial 1960 brief a giving Müller,afer Miklós , , A political dogma A political (Marxism, Leninism, Stalinism, etc.) Stalinism, Leninism, (Marxism, 15). 15). legacy describing it as as it describing legacy occasionally Eastern)occasionally “true” science scientists and the “pseudoscience” against espoused by Lysenko. Western of (and struggle heroic a as portrayed was “Lysenkoafair” Te bloc). Eastern the in satellites the by steered being as “hand Moscow,”'of events forcingLysenko’s of inspired–explanations its (particularly doctrineWar victims passive upon regime Soviet the of simplistic–Cold decidedly to resorted universally almost countries separate in campaigns these of memoirs) (particularly accounts historical according to according Another contemporary, though more removed, removed, more contemporary,though Another and Michurinist and biology now now expressed
‘grasp cheat’ ‘revolutionize e volutionary biologist, and first general secretary of of secretary general first and biologist, volutionary way’ opined something opined similar to contemporaries of Lysenko,contemporaries of to a any straw that seems to confirm their almost innate desire to have evolution in evolution have to desire innate almost their confirm to seems that straw any h a bandbcigfrfor backing obtained had who ” (deJong-Lambert ”
at a conference “ a at the popular opinion, opinion, popular the h ieo lnsadand plants of life the a a “ false doctrine” (Müller doctrine” false uses figurative figurative language uses
were UNESCO how the Bolshevik party and the Soviet state had subjugated statehad Soviet the and party Bolshevik the how ” 2007 ( nothingmorethan as one of the one of as initiatorsof Nabham 2009, in meaning
eattn cec science devastating the rise of Lysenko was due to political infuence; infuence; political to due was Lysenko of rise the , 12). 12). , 17 d ), ccording to to ccording , Julian Huxley, wrote in 1949 that “the major is major “the that 1949 in Huxley,wrote Julian Another animals.’ ‘prescientific , that,, Lysenko vitalist a was ( force 2011, 2011, 464). iial,Similarly, playwright George Bernard Shaw,Bernard George playwright : “[Lysenko] : ” (Igali 2002). figure [Prezent and Lysenko believed that] believed Lysenko and [Prezent the typical example of totalitarianide of example typical the prominent 1358). 1358).
wrote to Dunn that “ that Dunn to wrote (genetics (genetics n tbs 9hcnuycentury 19th best at and , geneticist and evolutionary biol evolutionary and geneticist , the United the Nations Educational, the modern evolutionary synthe Another HungarianAnother havingex uig te sme f 1953, of summer the during poured poured developmental biologist L. biologist developmental and biology and dialectical sauce on sauce dialectical Ibid. Lysenko was a was Lysenko ) . . , 16)., As d As ideas’ e in de in Jong
and Ly ” ------
CEU eTD Collection more elaborate “outside”the world becomes history and way, science as of it aspect coherentandthan complexmore Lamarckism 350). Union Soviet the in constituencies supporting its of terms in and biases personal fields,” “ the working it therefore peasants to also but establishment agricultural the and functionariescommunist to only not pealed agendas.” economic and cal, politi doctrine and scientific damaging driven hidden by force by ideological, false witha knowledge to wanted explanations.” ideological up cooked wayextent and before neverexperienced.” politics and mankind,ideology of century 20thblood-showered ItIgali was speech bettera than job Lysenko associates” his and (deJong-Lambert their toscience ends.If anyonehad out set toundermine have not agriculturecould done they Soviet the Another contemporary, Nobel Nobel contemporary, Another Te problem with all these refections is refections these all with problem Te s tone, cooler more a in Lastly, independenttruth for search contaminated by that cal doctrines.cal biologi false totally on generation whole a up brought and treatmentsanysubject, the of of periodicals and textbooks curricula, their expurgated lines, own their along researches further doing of portunity op the geneticists of file and rank their deprived genetics, in leaders great their of killed literally Ithas [i] warn . Secondly,. (2002) (2002) n this crucial area of biology the Russian system of absolute authoritarianism has in fact proved fatal. proved authoritarianism absolute fact of in system Russian has the biology of area crucial this n out of context context of out studies o the next generations that “how certain interest groups tried to to tried interestgenerations “how groups that certain next the again again (Ferguson 2011, 9) 2011,(Ferguson theseopinions, withoutalmost exception n who wentwho into the rise and fall of Lysenkoism the rise fall and Michurinist and biology. as a as n explanation n was socially constructed both in terms of Lysenko’s and of terms in ideological both constructed socially was conventional inherently cience historian Loren Graham Graham Loren historian cience laureate geneticist laureate Justifying his motivation to write this text, he says that he that says he text, this write to motivation his Justifying . figurative details in his memoir memoir his in figurative details Tat h As to the to As “l details, ahistorical and and ahistorical for ,
commentators make it seem by highlighting only one only commentators highlighting by seem make it ow false this view is, becomes clear when we considerwewhen clear becomes is, view this false ow firstly, Lysenko’s doctrines, 18 ideology and and ideology they are very eager to take up up take to eager very are they Herman J. Muller said said Muller J. Herman apolitical, devoid of any connections to connections any of devoid apolitical, acking 2007 and encroached the natural sciences in a naturalthesciences in encroached politics, and only by by only and politics, , ,
reliable experimentalreliable proof, they at least implicitlyat least 21). observed that observed whereas when he wrotethat when he “ Lamarck’s are theories substituteestablished ( Ibid. Lysenkoism ” ” , 23) 23) , , , (Hughes 2000, (Hughes expose science expose a reductionist a those in a 1958 a in [i] ; in thisin ; - - n the n “ap
- -
CEU eTD Collection tific community and the party” party” the and community tific scien the relationships between of system the reshape completely to wished they genetics: of ciation self, show, the explain taken efort great might to export itself.” science of content cognitive the into authority this expanding science, Soviet over cies agen party the of authority ultimate the reassert to and progress, world for force only the as USSR the of image the advance Western.”to intended and “was interventionSoviet Tis camps, opposing two establishment of final the policy: foreign and domestic in line party new a announce to pretext convenient a as Lysenkoists and geneticists between competition the used War. Stalin Cold lating Stalin’s in important factor Lysenko’s most on intervene to decision escathe was July 1948 in behalf with nor VASKhNILconference drop, the whole sion-making factor the inLysenko primary as supporting “madman;” of reason maintains solea argumentstillforthe ership his able, (Ibid. Stalin’s agriculture, collectivized cataclysmic for drive the was it and ology; Marxismlaunched Soviet on its quarrelsome appropriate of search an for theory distorted initially, embody not did inherent their to due not is biology Michurinist Lysenkoismand of rise the the determinantchief as textsMarx Engels and thisof of involvement much mistaken,”very is the that is, regard “to that contends 104) (1959, firstly, Joravsky analyses, simple more the from Starting E 4.2.
for It of is account similar A ascen political the Joravsky Evendetails though Western ), also sheds a diferent light on Lysenko, who now turns out to be another puppet used in the in used puppet another be to out turns now Lysenko,who on light diferent a sheds also NTER especially if we take into account how his his how account into take we if especially ota that so
that produced with Lysenko their their Stalinist as a as
HISTORY the arguments historical phenomenon. h etoe mentioned the ideological, ideological, Marxist VASKhNIL
was was ocpso of concepts not an openingan for what we know Lysenkoism now as Michurinist and biology. had, in fact, almost nothing to do do to nothing almost fact, in had, dialectical materialism dialectical that
supported by the the by supported political Krementsov’s implicitly meeting, “ meeting, oiiiaino yekim Lysenkoism of solidification Marxism ( Ibid. suitability suitability , ,
claim an unexplainable, an claim irrationallead Soviet inthe insanity the party agencies had a broader agenda than hadbroader a justagenda the agencies denun the party 168 . , who who , nta,“twstepormo of program the was “it Instead, Party ). ’s
Lysenko’s rise, T for the regime the for tells the Lysenko story in front of of front in Lysenkostory the tells hey wanted “ wanted hey at at opening address opening 19
because the beginning the which alone, as I will I show it later, as which alone, cannot explain dency teachings to the satellite teachings states ( his ideas were in in were ideas his of Lysenko; thereby of directly n ihrns ilg biology Michurinist and to establish complete control over the over control complete establish to . He He . for the the for was was with the with ( 1997, 159) 1997, carefully edited carefully sake of of sake perfect perfect ir ‘cultural ‘revolution ly actual scientific merit actual political nature, they nature, political writes: “… “… writes: refuting the comfort the refuting asserting themselves:asserting ‘red high political deci political high harmony with harmonywith a Cold War Cold back
specialists’ revolution’ by Stalin him Stalin by Ibid. from from ttethe at by far the far by , 181)., above’ inbi 1948 that Tis the s ” ------,
CEU eTD Collection making. a hardly be the Eventhough rialism seriously, iswhat democracy political nothing happened, more. that radical only suggests sense,it innocent, a in almost “Lysenkosince,makes whole the seem afair” accordingly. decided scientific issues and science, to tended politics.” to science to saythat as far as “ jevnikovof goes subordination simple than rather relationship two-way intimate an Roll-Hansen p Later C 4.3. ern science thereis is science if even that so science, of type other one on agricultureimpinge were for by quacks thirty-five time-servers abused tyrannically and years.” thatsciences the gether.all but genetics Not Farming only theoreticalideology. problem, not the was Joravsky him, of scientific aspects cognitive) and activity (intellectual from power their community, expanding n ever-conservativen perspective looking developments, at new failure a to comprehend inthe history T Roll-Hansen A more fruitful approach is of Le of approach is fruitful more A OMPLEX is is ost-Soviet or other, less mainstream authors, however, authors,mainstream other,less or ost-Soviet a a explanation better,still tural revolution not and simply “ an power.of self-taught holders thenew of valuesapplied, whyLysenkoismis Tat attemptan was cul at a enthusiastic, practical, engaged, the against classes middle old the of educated purevalues scientific, cal, theoreti elite, detached, the posing confict, revolutionary a was agriculture in confict the aspect every In Marxism. of vulgarisation a practice, and theory between confict a include to extended subtly was practicalagronomists intellectuals, the close-to-the-soil and themiddle-class efete thiscontest between evaluated today, they are right to denounce the “afair” denomination, since that imposes that since denomination,“afair” the denounce to right are they today, evaluated to maintain universal and its integrity applicability ( Ibid. ocue htLsnos Lysenkoism that concluded
EXPLANATIONS
wrote exact exact (2008, 169) 169) (2008, , 170) , scientific open in 1976 veracity of class-struggle being the the being class-struggle of veracity , , the “complex integration of scientific and political establishments implied political and scientific of “complexintegration the s up the the up but diferentkind,but in draws other conclusion other draws that … under matureStalinism,intraparty of were thedemocracy rules ex field of field wontin afair”. ‘external’ discussion, as the idea emerges that there might be at leastat thatbe emerges theretheidea might discussion, as and Michurinist biology Michurinist and
and and (Young 20 Levin’s (political, practical, and ideological) to to ideological) and practical, (political, way toward it, waytoward it, 1978) the the s ” ( from from , who, who, , search for truth, truth, for search Ibid. main driver driver main ” ” ( Ibid. , 18, . a started to realize that, that, realize to started
taking Marxism and dialectical mate dialectical takingMarxism and later work of Joravsky. of work later 3 , 170) Tis idea, for the first sight, first the for idea, Tis 170) , which ). “rebelled against science alto science against “rebelled behind this phenomenon can phenomenon this behind
implies th implies and truth is independent; is truth e failure of West failureof e in the words of words the in According to According ‘internal’ - -
Ko - - - - -
CEU eTD Collection 6 were 23,000 scientists participant peasant working in “ as entists” constraints thatfosteredthe institutionpositions; many brought budgetary into high “peasant sci of done,” things that ( 1938 in puttingtop Lysenko the to 193 Terrorof Great the Ten rhetoric, senkoist Vavilov like geneticists on demands and accountability hancing Vavilov’simpetus to interest infour toproduced toeties be instead fiveyears of grain formerthe gave tentwelve which to years, Michurinistbiology. lists Roll-Hansen 4. contribute to th be must there War, alone, Cold society science, of the integratedconceptions of capitalism technology.” its and and science positivism the of that to view alternative world an interactions)is mechanical and causalities simple than rather constitutiveness mutual and (interpenetrations processes dialectical of conception the ( understanding; dialectical this truly Marxistthe Soviet type, and at the time same is thecause important of inthose changes circumstances”( historical phenomena, results from material conjunction a circumstances, political and of ideological, importantly,More a Ibid. 3.1 died died VASKhNI of director the was ilov world the around from seeds of amounts large collecting personally geneticistbotanist Te and N. Ferguson Ferguson nti es,Lsnos Lysenkoism sense, this In a great many great a things . …. And their details ) , “ , of Lysenko’s a philosophy of nature, persons and society with labour at the heart of its ontology, while ontology, its of heart the at labour with society and persons nature, of philosophy a starvation in prison, was and buried in mass a grave. trained agronomists were not able to be placed at every village” so that “by 1929 there 1929 “by that so village” every at placed be to able not were agronomists trained (2011, 12-13) 12-13) (2011, htvrti a en mean; may this whatever is whole. further contributing to the demise of of demise the to contributing further infuence unwillingly.infuence Another numerous t another place place another t One of them is is them of One contributed to Lysenko’s ascendanc . . Next, in time genetics became became genetics time in Next, 6 reliability even moreevenquickly( so reliability Lysenko’sin vernalization (Roll-Hansentechnique 174), 2008, events in history which contributed to the rise of Lysenkoism and Lysenkoism of rise the to contributed which history in events lists other points as well, such as the the as such well, as points other lists I. Vavilov 4 n ihrns Michurinist and 4 -40 L. Later he was arrested arrested was he Later L. Lewontin removed Vavilov from the presidential chair of VASHKhNIL, of chair presidential the from Vavilov removed Ibid. a July 1931 July1931 a is best known best identif for , 180). 180). , the circumstance that collectivization and state ideology state and collectivization that circumstance the
and Levins Levins and other factors as well. well. as factors other Tis Tis Soviet Soviet 21 ilg biology event is is event o ‘hut list could go on and on, but we can already see already can we but on, and on go could list n n a a government decree governmentdecree countryside countryside
antb be cannot the the ying labs’ the the note that “ that note enmeshed with with enmeshed y . exemplifiedhere; for the Leningrad seed bank. seed Leningrad the for the centers the cultivated originsof of plants while Ibid. belief in belief introduction of
throughout the Union.” Soviet , 175), 175), , fact that Lysenko was able to “get to able Lysenkowas that fact expedition, expedition, explained by ideology, politics, ideology, by explained Let us see now some parts that parts some now see us Let Lysenkoism, like all non-trivial all Lysenkoism, like Weste thusincreasing thepressure that demanded new vari new that demanded Nazi eugenics in the Ly the in eugenics Nazi r then tried tried then
planned economy economy planned n science science n is, accord is, Ibid. ). ). At th At As opposed to opposed As and ing to Youngtoing ( Ibid. tortured. tortured. is time, Vavtime, thusen , 177). , that He - - - - -
CEU eTD Collection reasons to take up these aspects as well. well. as take reasonsto up aspects these importantfor further reason issues these consider not authorsEitherthe did manythings. be termscould possible broadest the in and it. toward relationsociety’s humans’and about environment, nor the about thing mentionedany publications reviewed I the of none Almost second. firstand the the to tion,not but history. and politics about talk only they criticism ough m justification for sound perfectly A topic. the of complexity sheer the sent paper’sthis goals. and and abilities myaims yond impressive and certainly are lists Tese 4. factors: ence” ( sci value-neutral of domain the into ideology and politics of values alien the of intrusion the about myth “self-congratulatory” and “self-conscious” simplistic plying scare of 1927, war, (8) cold (9) xenophobia. overcome the attitudes wrecking (6) experts, and of kulaks bourgeois and to need (5) revolution, cultural (4) collectivisation, (3) industrialisation, rapid for need perceived Young (1978) 4.
I believe there believe I Lastly, it is again again is it Lastly, Although Te reasons for being silent about the “environment the about silent being for reasons Te C RITIQUE long, long, Ibid. cratic administrative and apparatus. (Ferguson 10) 2011, bureaurepressive dogmatic and a and superpower… rival competitiona with contextof tionalpolitical keptIn level. addition,general discourse atthe most these circumstanceslarger,wereain nested interna which issues political and philosophical of relevance the in belief widespread a was emy.there Finally, buddingcultural a revolution elitistan theoftension put acad youth exacerbated theand view between afair. Fourth,public a made was method and theory overdebates the science, popularization the of and literacy high to due Tird, content. intellectual draw to which from characteristics, acquired inheritance through of transmission the as such conceptions Lamarckian discredited with along practices and traditionsthe agricultural non-academic of to strands were there Second, due agriculture. Soviet of proposals needs pressing radical to receptive society Soviet in time a during developed Lysenkoism First, ). now compressednow lists the following contributing historical factors: “ factors: contributing historical following the lists these keywords keywords these of these, besides the just given reasons, is that that is reasons, given just the besides these, is a is a reason forreason it. Lewontin s
, or they did not consider notthey ordid , themselves for further enough knowledgeable expositions are enigmatic enigmatic are and Le and correct Nevertheless,anotheranswer, be there might that thissilence vins
make think us Tey perfectly deliver answers to my third research ques research third my to answers deliver perfectly Tey ” who who now, taken out of context, the context,now, of outtaken to an extent, but evaluating their actual evaluatingactual extent,their but an to 22 Despite or because of this, they are meant to repre to meant are they this, of because or Despite speculated most impressively on the contributing the on impressively most speculated more and organisms and about “ about they they deeply,instead of (1) revolution from above, (2) the (2) above, from revolution (1) all Lysenkoism as a cautionary tale cautionary a as Lysenkoism are are ” , and “humans and society” ”, “humansand and ‘on very similar in one respect: one in similar very ir amount and nature amountand ir the grain the grain y not engaging in thor in engaging not readily readily Tis is a problem, a is Tis front’ veracity veracity accepting , (7), war - - - is be is
im the ------
CEU eTD Collection and somewhat inhumane deterministic taste of classical genetics did not suit his romantic and holis romantic and his suit not did genetics classical inhumaneof somewhat deterministic taste and under environmentalheredity of malleability mechanistictheabout infuence.Te Lamarckian ideas ( first five-year plan. the of the eve on 1928, the killed that winters and 1927 both in extensively harsh happened Tis problem. critical a and became sowings winter of product, seedlings agricultural key the was Grain background. nomic in More somethingplies similar 2007 completeness” approach ever only could disproof such negative—and universal are characteristics acquired proving of possibility tain enter to tried phenomenon, the to central be to consideringit them, of some that much, teristicsso to Lysenkoism Michurinistnected and biology authors many before, quoted have I As vitalism. and ckism few a only Lysenkoism Michurinist biology, and Firstly,looking atby the 4.4.1. Te questions. discussed the of cussion theauthorsBykeeping silentall issues,theseonalmost vironment the thesilenceof is Ibid. some a specific train of thought. As Dunn Dobzhansky, As wrote to of thought. train specific a , , , 183) writes 183) , deliberate 14). 14). way way
and techniques—plows or weeding—brought from the city, caused suspicion or ridicule; worse than worse at. was beinglaughed evil ridicule; or suspicion caused city, the from weeding—brought or techniques—plows and “ like, signs by determined was water Fairies, magic. of full and unpredictable sow reap or to season Te eye. was evil the feared everyone forests, and the filled nymphs, devils demons and Life to. needed or read, could people Few stove. the on asleep spent be might days cruel was weather the and hard was ground the when winter the In hugely contributes to the aim of this paper, this of aim contributesthe to hugely lack of Regarding Shaw’s LysenkoRegarding deJong-Lambertof vitalism, defense with and organisms and or other or m , and elevated the discourse to a a to discourse the elevated and , accounts environment organisms and that:“Like many lef-leaningintellectuals,andpoliticians Stalinfor spot sof had a shared shared . Roll-Hansen . when discussing the biographical background of Lysenko: background when discussing the biographical conceptionthe of , and humans and society in relation to each other and manyother otherand each relation to in humanssociety and and , mentiontheenvironment discourse; the silence of of the silence discourse; when (2008, 173) 173) (2008, the tree gets gets tree the ” ” environment Furthermore,Roll-Hansen politics, to connected though Lamarck’s notes about vernalization that about notes high mentions appear, and mostly on the level of Lamar of level the mentionson mostly appear, and 23 not dressed,” the as a historical factor factor historical a as inherited. Tis would require demonstratinga require would Tis inherited. er, as as approval unwillingly cultural level. level. cultural and organismsand this is the the is this idea of of idea or a certain bird arriving in the village. Tools village. the arriving in bird certain a or and of the of t he the inheritance of acquired charac acquired inheritanceof the contemporar justification or unwittingly or “part of the problem was the im the thewas problem of “part definition Examin
in the whole phenomenonwhole thein of infuencingLysenko’s career in for my three researchthree my for it had “ had it ( g what what g theen of place and e fLsnoLysenko of ies 2012, f orestalled (deJong-Lambert 174) 174) a serious eco serious a has not be not also im also entities. the
con dis en ------
CEU eTD Collection Michurinist biology however,] rather than applying dialectical materialism to produce the produce to materialism dialectical applying than [ rather … however,] biology Marxism, Michurinist of conceptions normative the with well fit poses “ that fact the Despite dimension of social humanand life. means Tis in 1933, the alike; ism the before adventeven Lysenkoismof Michurinistand dismissing LamarckMorganism and biology, at Looking 4.4.2. One theory. political and Young As (1978) writes: intraspecificcompetitiona and is ofwaste resources exists, ( not not working, does was Lysenko, of fall the intimate of plants.” practical knowledge an Lysenko,had unlike not he, felt who gardener hobby passionate a also was Stalin tendencies. tic On the highest level of discussion,theenvironmentof level the highest On with intertwinedphilosophyappears closely environment, the was it Ultimately Tis such problem could very well be the well be such problem very could Te lack of h “man factor a of evolution”: as follows from Philosophers have sought to understand the world. Te point, however, is it. to change economy. socialist planned 1959, a (Joravsky with consonant researches new design to or theory), evolutionary of all above (and science world accomplishments of the efectivelyutilize to either possible socialist not is economy, it planned a of conditions the in world plant and animal the infuencing of are possibilities the Without… formations,considering various inwhat socio-historical man does without considering what erarchical division of labour … dismantlehi the and knowledge attempting socialise is to movement revolutionary which any by faced be must which problem a to Lysenkoism points sense, this In socialism. retarded scientism whose perts ex recalcitrant the of removal the and fatalism, biologistic of rejection the planning), socialist of heart centretheat Marx’swas of (which fatalism economistic bourgeois of rejection the constructioncentralsocialism: the are to of which threestruggles congruent it Stalinismhadwithin how how that any biological and genetic theory is is theory genetic and biological any that Communist Academy’s theme new announced a Institute established newly Biology of the concepts of humans and society humans of society conceptsthe and umans society and as as by the early early the by Marx’s modification and intervention in the evolution of organisms for human pur human for organisms of evolution the in intervention and modification 103 )
11th thesis on F sixties it was obvious that cluster planting, based on on based planting, cluster that obvious was it including living organisms living including presumed e uerbach 24 independence of science. featureLysenkoismin Michurinist and biology; flawed : unless it considers explicitly the cultural the explicitly considers it unless i that, that, n the case of Lysenkoism and Lysenkoism of case the n as as Capital a factor, and rightly at the rightly at and
contributed to contributed Ibid. the idea idea the , , 186). m - -
, the ,
that - -
CEU eTD Collection ment for changing this objective world; it teaches how to infuence this nature and to change it change ( to and nature this infuence to how teaches it world; objective this changing for ment not must instru an he is materialism but dialectical of nature, philosophy Te … nature.of contemplatethis outwardly merely part a is Man … reconstructed. fully be science can Stalin and Lenin “ lines: these included conference VASKhNIL sentiment,remarkablysimilar expressesa yoke!” ture’ note Graham man to able man’s nature. (human) environment:transforming linkage. a formed tics to creators Soviet spects humanity” ofnew a (Young 1972). re some in attractive very were they while them, with compatible was it But characteristics. quired ac of inheritance the of ideas Lamarckian from derived not was shows) convincingly Joravsky (as since as biology Michurinist and Lysenkoism legitimize to tunity (deJong-Lambert Krementsov and 2012, 374). heredity and nature alter to helpless were humans that imply to church Catholic the by plot a was Zirkle, to cording innamescience (Ferguson only” 2011, 15). Marxist a was Lysenkoism results. false of promotion and field in experience from born were tenets Ibid. Tis idea idea Tis reason, the was environment social and natural the modify to power human in belief Tis As Young ( Young As Stalinis of definition quick the in seen have we as Just became the basis ofwhole a programme” the basis ( became intervention, ). afer a time time a afer . Tere opens before man a broad field of activity of the greatest value to him” to greatest value the of activity of field broad a man before opens Tere . s of , “by the time of of time the “by , humans and their place in the the in place their humansand Ibid. this this why Lysenko and his followers, followers, his Lysenko and why to force ) notes, the 1949 Chinese revolution’s slogan, “Trow of Nature’s insolent Nature’s of “Trow slogan, revolution’s Chinese 1949 the notes, ) tenet became became tenet N ow here is another linkage, th linkage, another is here ow anyform of animalplant or Lysenko’s one of of one ascendancy in 1948, the slogan slogan the 1948, in ascendancy the the Lysenko recited Michurin’s“ Lysenkorecited words: Ibid. basic qualities basic Only on the basis of the teachings of Marx, Engels, Marx, of teachings the of basis the on Only scheme so much thatLysenko’smuch so 1948 the at address opening 25 by pointing to Mendel, Mendel, to pointing by ). of things things of i to changemorequickly in adirection and desir s time between humans and society, and the and society, and humans between time s t socialism t of the new new the of valid served as served axs Marxist
earlier socialist socialist a perfect perfect a ‘the “ could claim that genetics that claim could , environment and poli environment and , science; e science; transformation of transformationof man: “Lysenkoism man: It is possible, with possible, is It posterior oppor posterior e oemore ven (Ibid.). As na ac so, ” ” ------
CEU eTD Collection and science and ideology and society, and mans all. afer genetics and biology about not great providesa least at diferent kind working of democracy inside the historical materialism,rigorous dialectical, free; Lysenkoroam lowing to al for illness mental of type some Unionfrom sufered Soviet the of implicitly, leaders the least that Frexplanations. historical detailed complex, very to opinion thefield of thoughts and frombroadened the slowly changed, Michurinistbiology passed, time as that, seen have we Review Literature this During that only emerges fromthis perspective,contradicting thatopinion: wishful themaygeneral sciencethe notbe Young( toable represent and society, and humans the of ter of all? afer LysenkoismMichurinist biology was and What this? all of make to we are What 4. 5. C 5. . Te multitude of questions multitudethat of Lysenkoism Te As way of knowing: knowing: of way fact, for the fact, of this matter purposes not thesis, it does synthe ONCLUSION J. T. Desanti wrote Ibid. the viewpointof the rising class. or ruling express yet and objective be can science of content the how explains Tis … labour. of organisation of formsustains the and productive forces promotesthe activity social whose class interests the the of also hence and edifice; social whole the sustain that forces productive the of state the refects achieved is it way the labour.society: thein whole of fruit theachieved Hence is is it it tools, uses it isolation; man in of work the not transformation Now, is this it. master to labour this by learn to and it with contact in forged naturetools brute with attack to means us for To thing itself. a into itself in transformthing the development undoubted the understand to one is How content? its of objectivity the understand to one a is too science that all above means proletarian fundamentallyscience contradictory a and science bourgeois a there is Tat — ), “ ), tic and this has not been researched thoroughly until researched thisand been hasnot now.
approach approach this paper’s historical phenomenon interpenetrations and mutual constitutiveness.” mutual and interpenetrations ? … Science is the fruit of human labour and in this labourdetermineshumanthisin man inof nature is and labour fruit it theis as Science … ? not not further further ideology and and ideology threeaspects the of matter of class struggle, a party matter party a struggle, class of matter as early as early as as the, to to but but research and politics; and seeing this phenomenon in in phenomenon this seeing a 1950 truth; and it may not be independent at all all at independent be not may it and truth;
politics, politics, impetus, Instead, they are about the environment the about are Instead,they on Lysenkoism resolutely
( and how these three things interfaced with each other each with interfaced things three these how and Ibid. pertaining to pertaining state apparatus: we have it all. seen that Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology thatLysenkoism Michurinist and biology ) corresponding to my research questions. research my to corresponding 26 and Michurinist biology Michurinist and biology as it really happened, with all its,really happened,with it inthe all wordsas of this time; time; this : . … If science is the product of a class, how is how class, a of product the is science If … . science: the environment the science: gravely front of a Cold War Cold to a backdrop; of front om to
bloody showers; to to showers; bloody even assertingeven that the perception of Lysenkoismand of perception the A very diferent image of science of image diferent very A . . W hat truly raised serves as a a as serves raised matters isthe and organisms and simplistic, general while engaged in engaged while therevery a was maintaining, at maintaining, and organisms, and unity of its of unity
As a mat a As Tese Tese are really are proof, proof,
validity apply
, hu , are or - - -
CEU eTD Collection of meanings and answers find to try will and Sciences, Hungarian Academyof Institutethe Genetic of at the 1965 and 1948 between happenedHungaryit in how examine For will thesis, I this rest the of universal
significance. 27
CEU eTD Collection 7 wording the time, this but held, was debate another 1958 in but happened, exactly what clear not open debateresulted inan about the universities. at genetics of need and lack insu the about talks when 1953-54, approximately until vegetativeinclude hybridizationto forced was GI the riod, theLysenkoistmade which of both Michurinistand concrete,mission repressing genetics. research, scientific Hungarian of plan Accordingmyto sources, tentativeafer whole of the chapter. Findings graphs, others. the chronologically pened. portant mainis conclusionat of mythe of end findings the third subchapter. arrivingat in discussionthe frame to me orderferent thatfromstructure Introduction, the deviate now will I conclusion. a toward me lead it let I found: that, meant events. historical to those compare can I that so biology Michurinist and Lysenkoism of tion the in interested mainly was I thesis this writing and researching During 5.1.1. Introduction; summary short a and 5 Findings 5. . 1. 1. 1970-1979 ( grafing” plant during other each upon scion and stock the of infuence Vegetative hybridization Before my findings, my Before RQ1: RQ1:
While examining While to make comprehension more practical more comprehension make to milestones milestones
humans and society humans and H I will insert a insert will I , first the the first , in the spirit of the interpretivist the approach, of spirit the in ) OW . . Accessed July 17. narrated, narrated,
DID to to originally originally
IDEOLOGY make my findings easier to follow by familiarizing the reader with what hap what with reader the familiarizing by follow to easier findings my make I will provide a brief summary of the political history of the GI through through GI the of history political the summary of brief providea will I was one of the main tools of Lysenko and Michurin; it it Michurin; Lysenkoand of tools main the of one was nalyses and refections at at refections and nalyses hs vns h the events, these which which URL: http://encyclopedia2.tthefreedictionary.com/Vegetative+HybridizationURL: a more more a at the end, end, the at third research question, then the the then question, research third is the main reason reason main the is
AND past past complete and the the and
wordings in 1949, the next year introducedyear the next1949, the in wordings POLITICS T repression, and of history where all three strands strands three all where hen hen Tis is the reason why, contrary to how I outlined it in it outlined I how to why,contrary reason the is Tis ealddetailed way by; beside by; way the meeting of the Biological Group on June 1, 1956 June 1, on Group Biological the of meeting the Te five-year plan of Hungarian biolog Hungarian of plan five-year Te ; this is the structure I will adhere to through the through to adhere will I structure the is this ; 28
INFLUENCE important why itr fteG ntepro ilb be will period the in GI the of history I relied on the documents and documentsand the on relied I by this this the that freedom now can enjoy. the GI It is fficient education of breeders mention the mention breeders of education fficient 7 answeringquestionresearchthe in its researchcurricul its in points following the descriptive para descriptive the following points s s sub grounding it in groundingit
PLANT chapter is is chapter first actually actually Te Great Soviet Encyclopedia, Encyclopedia, Soviet Great Te , then the the then ,
is “the phenomenon of the mutual the of phenomenon “the is GENETIC scientists’ converged significantly significantly the second
um data that I found; datathat I RESEARCH
personal percep personal . . . . Tis is why thewhy is Tis the Tis Tis . . ical Te five-year Tis enables Tis longer than longer data thatI data Inpe this research era s in a a in ? 3rd ed., 3rd lasted Tis also dif im ------,
CEU eTD Collection 10 9 8 genetic and cultural, biological, before. mentioned documents the than biolog “We have to senkoAmong thecertain a degree. to“Methods” section, however,there is a by pounded ( husbandry animal increased and Rieger Béla Union” Soviet the of experiences the ( and science agrobiological advanced most the on based is “ by developed and reorganized be to has breeding plant experiences.” Soviet agrobiology materialist modern of application and knowledge of “lack the is which of reason a leased, In 5.1.2. tioned Union, were doctrine.” Michurinist the from coexistence about talking careful, more wereoutcome the and Győrfy? 1949 Győrfy? April April from 1949. they advance, in developed always were plans five-year the since but dated, not are documents Tese http://encyclopedia2.thefreedictionary.com/Forage-Grass+Cultivation regions” cotton-growing in especially diseases, yo among weeds of growth the inhibits aeration); retention, water permeability, (water soil of properties physical the cultivation fields. improvesin Forage-grass grasses structurethe cereal and and mixtures ofperennialtionlegumes of Vil’iams provided“V. scientific R. and theoretical substantiation of thepositive exertedefect by theperiodic cultiva because metaboli presumably things, other among agrobiology work scientific his called Lysenko Ten year, same Novemberthe In more reserved, reserved, more ung crops; increases the yields industrial, of grains, other and crops grown controls and afer grasses; crop pests and Te establishment inthe early ical in internal historical refections which genetics return genetics 1949, 1949, research research Te five-year plan Te of Hungarianscientific research c process , a “plant breeding lecturer,” breeding “plant a , acquire V. R. Vil’iams R. V. asserts , 1)., the the between the between environment the and living; were Proposal for the reorganization and development of our plant breeding breeding plant our of development and reorganization the for Proposal
that planned Ten it it Ten the factual ed method released around 1950 around released with full force, and Lysenkoism or Michurinist biology is not even men even not is biology Michurinist or Lysenkoism and force, full with 9 in tone, then finally in 1965-66 with the fall of Lysenko in the Soviet the in Lysenko of fall the with 1965-66 in finally then tone, in , , i s stated, stated, s and his his and future s Afer this period of of period this Afer of the new Soviet agrobiology” ( of the agrobiology” Soviet new Te five-year plan of agricultural plant breeding was completed by completed was breeding plant agricultural of plan five-year Te scientific work forage-grass crop forage-grass fifies principles were quickly quickly were principles actually repeated, actually can be drawn. be can anymore. Based on these texts, the following following the texts, these on Based in which in ; ; and theand Institute T ra oitEccoei 99.1979). Encyclopedia Soviet Great (Te 10 , both of which make much more explicit statements explicit more much make which of both , Let us see now what us see happenedLet inthe beginning. 29 is not pursuedthe not state’s on is plant sites, 15 breeding one of the the of one oain. rotation).” these latter beingcultivated plants. uncertainty, the documents of the early early the of documents the uncertainty, that in order to comp to order in that ensuringbreeders plantour that of workthe and the and adopted by Soviet agriculture and Ly and agriculture Soviet by adopted targets is “sustaining soil productivity, “sustainingsoil is targets at most at Forage-g Rieger 1949, 1 Rieger Te five-year Te plan of Hungarian , rather “freeingthan , rass crop rotation was ex was rotation crop rass much clearer expression: sketch of sketch l ete the outlined tasks, outlined the ete Accessed July 25. URL: 25. July Accessed his focus was always always was focus his ). imag may originate may ined ined ourselves was re was sixties 8 agri and the ------
CEU eTD Collection transferred to transferred Martonvásár,Központ)dományos at CentreScientific Agricultural the controlunder(Mezőgazdasági the of Tu instituteplaced new was Te times. new arrival theIntézet),of Institute indicated name whose Agrobiological (Agrobiológiai instrumentsand were destroyed, Intézet) called body, independent an became it time this but 1942, in again then year, next the name its changed laboratory a as 1939 in founded where But Michurinist biology, senko”( advanc the and worldview, materialist tion crop of the grass rotation system of Vil’iams, and Michu on based eties possible,” as 1) (Ibid., perfectly Michurinist biology of methods and principles the of developmentfurther and tion, biology” in present still theories ist five-yearplan biological the of goals the of promotes ology” that practiced inthe the Hungarian researchbe should biological “ wasthe it national the of five-year plan, the targets besides biology, for five-year plan the ing work search Union. Soviet the of science edge scientificyear plan, we have in science Soviet of ology the applicationMarxism-Leninism, increased of ofthe and methodology “consistently” followed be principle that to A has How How n14,hwvr h oenetcetdanwrsac oybody research new a created Government the however, 1949, In “dialectical the be will research biological foundationsof the however,if succeed, only can Tis Plant Plant that serve Anon. 1950?b Anon. (Sárkány (Sárkány the fight against against fight the it it was was is to be be to is has has Genetic the the the Genetic Institute Institute Genetic the bec d 1948, as a foundation a as for the plan Section of Agricultural Sciences Sciences Agricultural of Section o [t]his done? “ done? and Breeding Research Institute (Növényörökléstanié Institute Research Breeding and me me r inist methods” ( methods” inist , 1). 1). , 1-2). 1-2). productive research.” It is further explained: “ explained: further research.” is It leading-edge theory hasto theory leading-edge enemy ideologies, ideologies, enemy Since “it was “it Since to [t] During During rely rely he he since “ since but gradual a rebuilding s at at recognition and application of the the of application and recognition It is already due to e.g. Michurinist biology that plan breeding re breeding plan that Michurinistbiology e.g. to due already Itis increasingly morethan the on before ” ( ” ( the Seed Monitoring Station (Vetőmagvizsgáló Állomás), Állomás), (Vetőmagvizsgáló Station Monitoring Seed the Anon. 1950?b Anon. ( during these events these during the the [t] Anon. 1950?a Anon. Anon. 1950?a Anon. Anon. ing the dialectical materialist materialist dialectical the he task of plant breeding is to produce higher yielding vari yielding higher produce to is breeding plant of task he WorldWar II oitbooy h ecig fof teachings the biology, Soviet is is
that “it 1949 primarily cosmopolitanism,”primarily ( ( Anon. 1950? 30 in science science in ab of the the of , 1). 1). , , , 12). 12). , should should ) 1). 1). vegetative hybridization where it remained until next year when when year until next remained it where steer our bombings at Budapest, most of the facilities the of most Budapest, at bombings T o achieve this, this, To achieve Similarly ? ? oon started started oon Hungarian Academy of Sciences Sciences of Academy Hungarian More concretely,More mean this Te predecessor of the GI was originally was GI the of predecessor Te is is serve as a s a as serve b In order to successfully realize our five- our realize successfully to order In , 1), the “vindicationandthe the world view of genetic . spirit of the leading-edge Soviet bi Soviet spiritleading-edge the of , , approach in in approach it is mentioned that that mentioned is it achievements (Ibid., studies as well” studiesas ( upport f upport achievements “ replacing t replacing achievements [t] Anon. 1950?a Anon. he recognition, applica recognition, he 4-5). Vil’iams s Nemesítéstani KutatóNemesítéstani s studies or or genetics genetics the purge the of Soviet science Soviet of hree others hree (Ibid., 11). –Michurin–Ly [is required] as required] [is of of s the introduc the Ibid. and method and for articulat for that that the leading- , 2) 2) , of ideal of ( , 5)., Győrfy created pursuit as it was it , the , then one ------
CEU eTD Collection writing places places writing the continuation research” of its basic genetic (Daniel 1966, 2). Sciences, cal (withoutsearch micro-evolution) ument, sciences, logical research, mesticgenetic Twolater,i years to researchers given be onshould tist, breeders plant and stock experimental all. at universities at education genetic no universities,there atis i.e. teach should whatwe genetics, thatof out amined participating genetics Sedlmayr, research. genetic domestic of tasks and situation the on report heard. my to According 5.1. ( tasks new with along Institute, Genetic name, new its received and Sciences, Medical and Biological of ing to theplan’s five-year scientific policy. its transferthe1950HAS, ing the to the body, vegetativeincluding hybridization, ( Institute to Genetic Institute, but due to the mentioned diferent a events, it received name and 1959?, 3 Enthusiasm ornot, the on later, year A also the also . . Te dissenting turning and voices point Győrf 1). On the November 9, 9, November the On this time is Agricultural Scientific Centre Centre Scientific Agricultural afer agreeing to the plan outlined by Győrfy, noted that “he also thinks thinks Győrfy,“healso thatby outlined noted plan the to agreeing afer Barna Győrfy, set aside set superior and supporter of Győrfy, Imre Törő, also noted that “ that noted also Törő, ImreGyőrfy, of supporter and superior by saying “We have to clarify what we mean by genetics…” and that “ that genetics…”and by mean we what clarify to “Wehave saying by y noting that “[the Section] Section] “[the that noting 1965 the turning point around 1953-54, which is altogether not surprising, since it was a was it since surprising, not altogether is which 1953-54, around point turning the that from n n sources, it was around 1953-54 when when 1953-54 around was it sources, [Clarifying this problem as soon as possible is also important] because graduated because important] also is possible as soon as problem this [Clarifying recently the summer of summerof the a also enabledthe renewed practicealso genetics” of ( , 1)., the enthusiastic of year that“ both the actual records and the subsequentthe andactual recordsthe both December 14, 14, December its causes director at director the time,1948inrequested changing already the name ofthe 1953 [w] hen the HAS in 1954 set out the developmentexperimentaloutthe of set 1954 bio in theHAS hen the field of genetics”the fieldof (Ibid.). , mentions transferthe1954 to the Section meeting of the Biology Committee, Barna Győrfy presented his presented Győrfy Barna Committee, Biology the of meeting 1956, Győrfy said in in said Győrfy 1956, really Győrfy 1956, Győrfy1956, tasks largely remained the same, as that body also also that as body same, remainedthe largely tasks severely great great granted granted 1954 believed in in believed Finally, in1954, the Institute transferred was to the
meeting of the Biology Committee, Committee, Biology the of meeting 1966 entitled of 1953-54 damage” ( damage”
feel the lack of it” it” of lack the feel [the Institution][the 31 40 the “new approach approach “new the ) ) since, as Győrfy as since, Anon. his the first publicly dissenting voices could be could voices dissenting publicly first the presentation Te stateHungarian of plantgenetics re 195 independence again, and and again, independence One of the scientists present, Kurt present, scientists the of One ( 3 Anon. 1954 Anon. internalpresentation and Győrfy 1956, , 3)., ( hailing hailing Ibid., 3 Ibid., on on the achievements of do of achievements the of Biological and Medi of Biological greater encouragement greater from Moscow”. from , 10). Another scien Another 10). , ) ) writes,thesuperior 36 [i] that the fact that fact thatthe Győrfy was also was Győrfy ). ). t has to be be to has t A acted accord acted nother approved Section history tasks, doc Dur ex ------
CEU eTD Collection claim genes of definition the Nevertheless, statement, or still out of some whether know never might fact, in and criticism, a in mentioned indirectly but openly is ideology or politics when first time the is it researchers.” certain toward sonality research genetic of freedom the when conditions 9). agreed Ten ble.” and beside or research; genetic and biological of ments harsh their articulated only they ogy; dissent of Until voices now, the on tion i Ten, 5.1.4. end to the discussion decisive a put geneticists, the of side the on least at which DNA, of structure molecular the of ery processthat have many infuenced could by been factors. Later now already obsolete authorities in biology, biology, in authorities obsolete already now He nan ed in his critique: “Ten came a period, and either the total total the either and period, a came “Ten critique: his in 1956: “W h omnscomments the that that t was in in was t that the achievements of domestic genetic research research genetic domestic of achievements the (Ibid.) Endre Papp, plantbreeder, a said xlnto fLsnos n ihrns ilg.biology. Michurinist and Lysenkoism of explanation dispensing with registry). animal supposed causing in succeeded it years, short this ments” observations and tology.”biology Manyof facts is which created, was biology of form new peculiar a years, Inrecent in the field of plant genetics, “citatology [indeed] caused severe damage” ( damage” severe caused [indeed] “citatology genetics, plant of field the in recitation of “authorities” of and recitation attacked “ András Balázs then talk then Balázs András due to the cult of personality and dogmatism, contrary to previous conditions, certain conditions, previous to contrary dogmatism, and personality of cult the to due then the summer of of summer the e are M organist genetics with with genetics organist said liberated from the o fflo cetssscientists fellow of f the that : scientific merits of Lysenkoism and Michurinistbiology was it was it fear fear of strongly questionable worth, 1956, 1956, “ other the mention not did own starkly starkly of experimentallyproved due it being a a being it due Tis was an important moment, since according to my sources, my to according since moment, important an was Tis retribution. as I mentioned, mentioned, I as edfrsaei cec.science. in space for need ed the forced forced the more severe damage to the Hungarian peoples’ economy than the than economy peoples’ Hungarian the to damage severe more oppression of dogmatism” about “damages caused by dogmatism,” by caused “damages about penetrated olwd fwihIwl ihih oe some. highlight will I which of followed, ( Ibid. twisted the genetics of the turn of the century. the of turn the of genetics the twisted , , execution of its ideas ideas its of execution 32 1 restarting genetic research became almost impossi almost became research genetic restarting was was 9) 9) widely s
the distortion of those, those, of distortion the by dogmatism” dogmatism” by that“
impeded by by impeded were set aside. Relying sometimes on sometimeson Relying aside. set were when Győrfy was asked to to asked was Győrfy when before the the before using ofen One such could havesuchthecould One 1953 been
shared sentiment and and sentiment shared breeding hybrids could not find favorable find not hybrids could breeding camp tpoe ob otgos contagious, be to proved It , Lysenkoism and MichurinistLysenkoismbiol and , neglect was however, 36), (1956, Győrfy dogmatic dogmatic cloudy and terminology, new vague ( Biology Committee Committee Biology aptly described by the name “cita name the by described aptly domesticating domesticating (Ibid., 22 (Ibid.,
of of prejudice, or or prejudice, the up to date achieve date to up the with with -23 lemon and and lemon and and hrfr therefore ). ). deliver a presenta a deliver . highlighting highlighting Béla Pozsár also Pozsár Béla the question of question the “experi new And in few in And Andor Bálint Andor Anon. Anon. of the HAS. the of cult of of cult cotton, a
but discov perfect 1956, - -
per we late ------
CEU eTD Collection Michurinist 12). be experimentswill these that using but base, if correct is it think “I concluded: of us,that forall here are two “ that later bit a said also Bálint biology. Michurinist Lysenkoismand of missal there then or damages not? could body istrative seriously that now personality. of Papp’scult the before them and dogmatismof comment about all contagious side, the Despite 5.1.4.1. Critique plause Maucha Á by saying: weredismissals present in rpád Virág continued with the damages caused by dogmatism (Ibid., 34), then at the end, Rezső end, the at then 34), (Ibid., dogmatism by caused damages the with continued Virág rpád If I would be engag be would I If interesting Evenmore it is how damages, severe caused thatsuppression the from free are genetics and biology now If Andor Bálint said said Bálint Andor the credibility of the closingthe statement credibility : (Ibid., 42) (Ibid., hindered, evensincehindered, less so sonality, we are of aim the thought, the highlight to like would only I time, of shortage the to Due of Westernteachings biology. of position any debate academic Soviet great the 1948, In s, among whom he may have belonged (Ibid., 11), 11), (Ibid., belonged havemay he whom among s, conclusion’s positive, unifying force, there were some voices of dissent from even this even from dissent of voices some were there force, unifying conclusion’spositive, drawback this this methodological principles genuinely, principles methodological presentation, that presentation,that himno h eae lsdi ihaceru oenote cheerful a with it closed debate, the of chairman , cmlasnadhshis and Schmalhausen s nuneinfuence —ensured not a scientific but primarily a political victory to to Lysenko’s victory political a primarilybut scientific a not —ensured liberated from the that that ing cytology cytology is Igali (2002) certainly in speculation, I would say that Bálint wanted to save some space for space some save to wanted Bálint that say would I speculation, in “during these four-five years, the development of genetics [could not be] not genetics [could of “duringdevelopment the four-fiveyears, these a a schools, two theories each two other” facing ( schools, verifiable, reproducible, and will satisfy satisfy will and reproducible, verifiable, third approach approach third the the due to the resolutions of the the of resolutions the to due adherents of both schools schools both adherentsof also curriculum it is directorit comrade is Győrfy whoknowsthatit best admin no oppression of dogmatism. … ” elw,wowho fellows, (Ibid., 28). remains — and work of the Genetic Institute” (Ibid., 9)? Were 9)? (Ibid., Institute” Genetic the of work and that now we not only know, but we can openly openly can we know,but only not we now 33 claims hnaraydrdt cetaccept to dared already then seems to go against the conclusion’sdis the definite against go to seems It Márk was Fodor in mutually question. it in his paper. it inhis XX. Congress XX. starting out from their own theoretical own their from out starting accepted, design their experiments,so their design accepted, in a in n embarrassingitsituationwhere n all Anon. 1956 pertaining to the cult of per of cult the to pertaining (Ibid., 30) scientific scientific emphasis of which was the was which of emphasis eti certain that received great ap great received that in essence, it is clear is it essence, in school
whomadedirect it , 10)., Later on, he unquestionable standards”(Ibid., say it it say against the against without -
So - - -
CEU eTD Collection has an ideal form of complexity that should be treated reverently.treated be thatshould complexity of form ideal an has science that is assumption Te it. simplifying instance, for by, damage can afar from or outside the cists’ expectation of mutually scientific accepted standards or methodology. is biases collective of “ outputs: and inputs its in only internals, its in exactly, “treatingsince interestedby decided,” tour’slonger questionsnoalready boxing, are black we Nevertheless, also hand one the On 1956 ready value-laden, it isonly Western since that science hasthose standards inquestion. sideration, that, their or same the worth say, Western science practice they so method, scientific the use not do from expectations reasonable not are they fore as placed, periments—unfortunately—does exist not today” ( that “ on discarded. openly was real world” through, through, world” real how a “qualitatively”a diferent Furthermore, this comment implicitly assumes that science is a separate entity that people from people that entity separate a is science that assumes Furthermore,implicitly comment this “ Another, mis scientific are standards high mutuallyaccepted, for claims implicit or explicit these of Both L be a a be , , discourses two as domestic vegetative hybrid originatingfrom et us consider Győrfy’s statement, statement, Győrfy’s consider us et 7 ) the eforts to serve serve to eforts said that:said very diplomatic diplomatic very other way questions treating in either equations, personalized of into questions important turn simplify, unhealthily anyway, we ence in … danger greatest the see I the point is that such standards do not exist in Lysenkoism or Michurinist biology, there LysenkoismMichurinistbiology, or in exist not do standards such that is point the hrfr therefore part Faludi talks about unhealthy simplification, which is nothing else than a form of La of form a than else nothing is which simplification, unhealthy about talks Faludi pre-dogmatic” i as Western as genetics are cular discourse of discourse cular , this comment seems rather rather seems comment this , ]. not missing the geneticists’ claim to establish mutually accepted scientific standards is al is standards scientific accepted mutually establish to claim geneticists’ the valid for both sides, and, as I have shown, it was very prominent in the the in prominent very was it shown, have I as and, sides, both for valid and see if it matches what we already thought about it. Tis silent acceptance silent Tis it. about thought already we what matches it if see and Nonetheless, some other comments also deserve attention, as they shed light shed they as attention, deserve also comments other some Nonetheless, aiming at the same same the at aiming society, society, attempt at a desperate reconciliation between the two schools of thought. of schools two the between reconciliation desperate a at attempt science omn ol ecnetdt hstogt thought. this to connected be could comment , but, when it comes to judg to comes it when Western genetic that . Tis does not mean thatmean not Lysenkoism is does Tis . Michurinistand biology simply in their their in , , though in parallel with parallel in goal do not exist pursuit of absolute material knowledge abut the world; the abut knowledge material absolute of pursuit starting out from diferent perspectives, but but perspectives, diferent from out starting , they were and are on the same level of of level same the on are wereand they , sober and refective, but on the other other the on but refective, and sober the geneticists’ the a a 34 (scientific) (scientific) grafing bad science, bad Győrfy 1956 science science inthe Lysenkoist discourse, ment already decided, either in citatology, or or citatology, in either decided, already
Bálint’s previous one, previous Bálint’s conforming imagined itself inrelationimagined to other things. by practical evidence practical by theory becomes a package we filter the filter we package a becomes theory side. It is not that Lysenkoistssimplythat not is It side. it is more than that: the methods of methods the that: than more is it , , 41). Approaching from the perspective the Approaching from primitive primitive
to the principles genetic of ex ones , , either in the form the in either in his presentation his in éaFld Faludi Béla because it is, it is, because . It It . damaging sci damaging one historical historical merely means merely , this could this , [ in in any ( geneti Anon. - let us
con ------
CEU eTD Collection this includes me as well. I believe that believe I this well. we are me includes as still at this point…” (Ibid., 81–82). Michurinist with fireand sword, school without knowingits and substance experimental and proofs; the spread way, this say me let they, when doubt without years for mistakes committed Academy] schools 1953-54 before period the in research netic education senkoist Agricultural com ments. the to foor the gave Törő Imre chairman occasion, previous the from report Győrfy’s and directorate HAS the of front in work convention great upcoming the before up cleared be should which Group, Biological the to forwarded and raised questionsweremany tee, Committee, on the agend thein Archives.database the of Tequestion HAS Lysenkoismof again was and Michurinist biology the was events of course the in milestone next Te 5.1. boxed black and tingent concepts biases, Lysenko’s to victory” Science; school. personality” of cult the and was liberation, least at or tory, natural and cial environment making are who those from separated be cannot, yet can, and making; the in is that science a of instead science, of concept istic myof TeoreticalFramework, however,this assumption proves false. to be 5 rn tabF F. Straub Bruno of comment the highlight first will I On vic its GI, the at Western genetics for success a be to proved 1956 year the Notwithstanding, . Te 1958 Genetic Debate: Te1958. Genetic Debate: — thatday, the was the one-sided science policy of administrative policy science thewas one-sided bodies” (Ibid., 32). reasoning, that a month ago, on the 1958 September meeting of the Genetic Commit Genetic the of meeting September 1958 the on ago, month a that reasoning, a. I siue h ntematm eundfo h oitUinae eevn receiving afer Union Soviet the from returned meantime the in who nstitute, . According to him, “ him, to According .
management ondt ak’ pno hnh ad said: he when opinion Rajki’s to joined it that s s , who are in turn, similarly can and cannot be separated from their so their from separated be cannot and can similarly turn, in are who , that proudly and and proudly granted granted Restoration are molding them, and of the the of though ridden with its invisible, historically conditioned, con conditioned, historically invisible, its with ridden though where, among others, the Genetic Institute would present itspresent Institute would Genetic the others, among where, ( ; triumphed; [i] Anon. 1958 Anon. Biological Group organized a meeting inviting meeting the a organized Group Biological only Sándor Rajki, then the director of the the of director the then Rajki, Sándor n general, one of the obstacles of the development of ge of development the of obstacles the of one general, n openly announced afer the the afer announced openly , according to those present at the debate, a “political a debate, the at present those to according , — 35 nldn Mcuiitad h frait genetic formalist the and Michurinist including October 9, 9, October with , 1–2). 1–2). , a capitala s. that Afer reading the Genetic Committee’s Genetic the reading Afer they, inturn, mold also 1958 “Te particular [directorates of the of [directorates particular “Te
Genetic Debate, as it was called was it as Debate, Genetic oppression of “dogmatism of oppression I t representst a HAS HAS . Martonvásár static, dual Genetic Ly ------
CEU eTD Collection truth, again, articulated were schools two the of concept the though that present was unti again research genetic about around spread uncertainty same the Because … created be will phere fore simile, political ticular Rajki’s par and happened, what that much so 1956, in atmospherethan diferent markedly a was It repression. His infamous moment came of afraid not was country’sthehe institute; atinfuential breeding position plant leading very a had already moreover,he but soon, see will we as discussion the dominated extent, an to and, approach methodological two entific truth on, agree (Ibid., 33-40–34-40). only the is this because … well as ones those let ment, experigeneticists theseexperiment, let all us sentiment: similar “Let very expressing a also was Rajki marked who Bálint, Andor from arrived problem new and old this to solution new and old possible A , that: that: , It diferent a was stoptheway on the“liberation” todiferent time, Firstly,compared what was this 1956? So of present, was Rajki Finally, Törőwas it the“ who concluded discussion: and and (Ibid., 13–14-20) of. But this is such a thing that will be decided by experiments and facts at the end. So let us experi us let So end. ment,the form and our opinions to according theat facts. facts and experiments by decided be will that thing a such is this But of. political the betterAmericansforbe would toit leave simile, Taiwana To future. say now, until wait the to not and are they about doubts many so not have opinion, own my speak to I, me not. allow does and it say they or exists, it that say they side other the on whether of independently work will t that school development its genetics, Michurinist the not is It debating this issue now. Academydebate.genetic 1956theat as things and possible, as serious as scientifically things produce should schools both Wethat … think standings two from [things] interpret,explain to possible is it [since] … opinion own and standpointown respect [We should] … new scientifically something bring that, to according and standing, our and …, schools] two are [Tere [ then this is it not anytruth, but not “It is is “It that s of genetics in genetic science, genetic in genetics of
meticulously they they hoped that the currently currently the that hoped l 1954” ( try to to try haunted Győrfy even a year later when he he when later year a even Győrfy haunted ] . Tat. theregenetic science.then,Andone is that ultimately, there sci is one that: conforming to standards as possible. possible. standards conformingas to resolve and solve from diferent sides … Tere is one genetic science, and science, genetic one Tere fromdiferent is solve … resolve and sides genetic Győrfy, 1959? B. es ” (Ibid., truth secondly, because … … early inthe debate when he 111–112). standpoint is that let everyone work according according work everyone let that is standpoint the this time this Some havestandpoint, pointthisthere Some that no some and one, is muddled mood will settle down, and the healthy atmos healthy the and down, settle will mood muddled
straightforward admission of of admission straightforward , 11)., 36 , , meant meant thing thing
nowthere scientific one only was truth. Even If w the formal restorationformalthe Lysenkoism of and A he statement, that there are two prin two are there that statement, he e wantsummarize to the… platforms we s a matterfact, of a s that that helps the case of solving problems” solving of case the helps explicitly uniting them under one under them uniting explicitly wrote (Ibid., 42.) which, , , also also I already said this to the to this said already I
will benefit, benefit, will mentioning said that:said to to his own own his everybody’s because we because bundled any kind ofkindany under under Rajki Rajki cipal - - -
be re ------
CEU eTD Collection 122 ing’.” ourtheform of answers onlyquestions‘interest dictate not to be questionstobut which allowed are circumnavigate. to constitutes science. in politics right completely not was Framework.Nevertheless,he Teoretical the in outlined I what to similar something of core the understood certainly view,Törő between relationship the unscientific, incorrect statement” (Ibid.). th politics, is genetics Tat politics. is genetics that mean not does it But … biochemistry or physics nuclear from possible is it As drawn. be to possible are worldview nate, correct” isnot manifest. not does enceButwhich init course,of saying thatany inquestions science, political domi without So, politics. without exists science No “ tinued by saying: this but wouldthe be case, it came up many times that denied always I Because question. this at Welook to politics. have and ideology with practiced … question? this about What science. political tion. to the of intellectual level same merit the but “ dominant, the besides biology Michurinist ) Te relationship between politics and genetics was not settled, however. Bálint ( Bálint however. settled, not was genetics and politics between relationship Te to seemed Rajki and Győrfy both though Even “ agreed: Rajki interesting more Even “ disbelief: his articulate to quick was Rajki Itevent through significant when correspondinga looking lensthe it of was at my quesresearch Győrfy later returned to it: aura position same requirement in the of geneticist, a case teachers, or other professionals, who proper the but Morganist, not or Morganist being him to due … question political a is democracy is] point [Te of of observed scientific
in Such statement a uttered never was by me or Professor Bálint”
people’s As As Section Section (Ibid.). that even between geneticists and non-geneticists, the relationship toward the people’s the toward relationship the non-geneticists, and geneticists between even that very early inthe discussion very that: “ Lewontin (2007, 229) writes: “So the limitations of our conceptual schemes conceptual our of limitations the “So writes: 229) (2007, Lewontin freedom freedom democracy and and democracy ideology and and ideology is S ecretary c ecretary , however, what Törő replied: “ replied: Törő what however, , Te political is much is political Te was was s
sensibly sensibly than that of omrade Törő is completely right right completely is Törőomrade possess Terefore someone someone Terefore politics, and science science and politics,
appropriate formal” formal” gone with gone It has been said many times that genetics can only be only can genetics that times many said been Ithas this, It should be asked of whom said it” said whom of asked be should It 37 ” formal ( Anon. 1958, more, meaning worldview by politics, there is no sci no is there politics, by worldview meaning genetics. genetics. represent the general, mainstream opinion on opinion mainstream general, the represent in in scope ofscope authority. getting to the foreground or background is not is background or foreground the to getting It many said hasbeen times that isa genetics lifing Lysenkoism lifing Michurinist and biology genetics’ implying that it is only the worldview thatworldview the only is it thatimplying it is is it that that Tere is some politics in every science. every in politics some is Tere stance an embeddedness embeddedness an Te latter was not not was latter Te
21). I have shown in the Literature Re Literature the in shown have I . toward people’s democracy is the is people’stowarddemocracy at is a terrible vulgarization, and vulgarization, terrible a is that certain certain that represent responsible a probably (Ibid., 22). suppressed conclusions of a of conclusions (Ibid.) Anon. 1958 Anon.
impossible . . He con He again,
------,
CEU eTD Collection have been been have 2002) (Igali climate, political the to ing that maybe and temporary this Afer 5.1. into the system. whole that thinking dualistic one-sided, still is normality of part as deviation cepting diferent? very of instead are they way the things are Why diferent? bit little a of instead thinking. dialectical mality,” situation a goal’s,noble own,its otheror very forscience considered sake,their and ideal an in stillbelieved they they not did why it, of conscious as constituted partly of, and in people, the indeed is it that provesquotation Tis (Ibid., 123-130)event, this to back Referring science. ideological or political a is Lysenkoism that lines the Jankó,Béla candidate, doctoral a insociety. ofness people difficult, very approach refined more a is Tis Latour (1987, (1987, Latour 6 was presumably was dueto Just a few sentences later, however, he contradicted himself. In 1957, a year before this debate, this before year a 1957, In himself. contradicted he however,later, sentences few a Just . Te . could be be could and by temporariness, a diferent t diferent a temporariness, by and April that of 1957, is political a thing. diferent a is that tions, If … words such with of March the in obvious, that genetics question.is afer Tis political that1957,a is Michurinist about this like speaks Jankó] [i.e. someone, if thing, other Te comparative only as new as much as it it as much as new as only temporary temporary it —
would be would if not impossible, in a statist country; statist a in impossible, not if a diferent period began. began. period diferent a readily continued: 27) noted 27)
Echoing Lewontin and and Lewontin Echoing remarked deviation. deviation. assembled assembled dialectical materialismdialectical of the early [it is] a a is] [it Rajki’s . . upon whom the the whom upon almost right afer the proclaimed the afer right almost by Barna Győrfy in the Genetic Committee Committee Genetic the Barnain Győrfy by What is very difficult to explain, however, is that if they were already were they if that is however, explain, to difficult very is What stance But it is precisely acceptingpart, deviationprecisely as is But it when than Törő than applied it to their situation?their to it applied unexpected restoration of Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology Michurinist and Lysenkoism of restoration unexpected from infuence; and the 1956 Revolution the 1956and infuence; But to to But utterance was against against smaller parts; deviation is a part part a deviationis smallerparts; attend Or, let us say in a dialectical fashion, the new period could period new the fashion, dialectical a in say us let Or, bring this up that way in front of plenary crowd in the March or March the in crowd plenary of front in way that up this bring separated from infuences of the past and its own present. own its and past the of infuences from separated emporal perspective, emporal . ’ s people’s Levins , though delineating the the delineating though , fate ing his dissertation his defense, somethingsaid harsh along , or veracity for thatforveracity matter,or , statement a of depends, 38 and the historical circumstances they are situated are circumstancesthey historical the and democracy in that situation and that environmentthat situationand that… in democracy
yet it it yet ( 2007 sixties d finally finally the counter-revolution,the standmaking there a , 187 , One speculative answer would be that be would answerspeculative One liberation from from liberation that is implied by the process-based the by implied is that ) recognizes the political embedded political the recognizes : “ : that we should look at these questhese at look should thatwe Why are things the way they are they way the things are Why boundaries might prove to be to prove might boundaries
and its consequencespertainits and to be discarded as as discarded be to yet not not yet the believes believes “dark phantom”“dark a a part, not fitting not that every that ” ” of “norof Not ac Not Bálint -
— - - - -
CEU eTD Collection there is no no thereis ment, form and our opinions to according the facts” “ meeting: 1958 the at Lysenkoist faction the by decided been has what exactly is this conclusion. definite a reach experiments to order in treat 1). aspect, ical experimentaltimelythat is results,it opinionsin connection of diferent andtheir withthe schools evaluationgenetic of the methodology concept, genetic molecular the of cism quantitative ofanalysis the biological qualitative and changes” (Ibid.). “ “ brids”; parative heterosis of analysis phenomenon invegetative thelaw and generative segregation and of hy time. ertheless, theretothe were allude atmosphere which might otherwell, as at topics at listed the the GI Western-type, biological opposites ingenetics” “ quality”; yield of ods “ stance: be to topics the restoration of Marxism materialism dialectical and inits research rhetoric. run. long or short the in either efectively more future the modifying on energies therebyfocusing actors, su theWith 1958 restoration the logic, same represented only point a of convergence Te theoretical and methodological analysis of the two schools of genetics”; and “Te philosophical genetics”;“Te of and schools thetwo of analysis methodological theoretical Te and es all the time. time. the all of of Secondly, even though vegetative hybridization and the two schools of genetics are mentioned, are genetics of schools two the and hybridization vegetative though even Secondly, Firstly, topic? previous the of description the and topics the of titles the in common is What Furthermore,the on“ separate theof descriptionone topicscalled of sheet one last the of exception the With documents a archival the in across came I early Te ing Tese include: “ include: Tese prediction”; “Te study of heterosis phenomena in polyploids”; “ polyploids”; in phenomenaheterosis of study prediction”;“Te their subject seriously,surface; the subject on their least at Te efect of selection and and selection of efect Te Te analysis of the emergence and preservation of heterosis, and the development of meth of development the and heterosis, of preservation and emergence the of analysis Te reference to either Lysenko or Michurin. Tis suggests a a Lysenkoeithersuggests Michurin.reference Tis to or ofen ofen sixties researched researched It is significant only because it it because only significant is It Mammal zygote cultivation in in vitro conditions”; and “Te unity cultivationunity Mammal vitroin conditions”;in zygote “Te and problematic questions of genetics genetics of questions problematic therefore give the impression of quiet work with a more official and stern and official more a with work quiet of impression the give therefore ( Te study of the theoretical foundations of vegetative hybridization”; “Comhybridization”; vegetative of foundations theoretical the of study Te Anon. or genetic genetic or in the next years years next the in 1960?, 1-2). studies, mainly experimenting with, or explaining, hybrids. hybrids. explaining, or experimenting with, mainly studies, controlled cultivation on the generation of quantitative traits”;quantitative of generation the on cultivation controlled we ”
criticize and criticize and that in the “Targets” section we can read: “Due to contradictory to “Due read: can “Targets”we the section in is more philosophical, all of them are “regular,” is, are that them of all philosophical, more is under the direction of Győrfy of direction the under curriculum synchronized the present the synchronized 39 Judging only by the titles and some descriptions, some titlesand the by Judgingonly ( based on dialectical materialism” dialectical on based evaluate Sándor
they strive to they sheet, presumably from 1960presumably from sheet, Rajki,
the fundamental, and fundamental,the and in conduct comparativeand conduct studies more “objective,”more per less thatis,
Anon. Te study of the inheritancethe of study Te -times 1958, . . T Te analysis and critiandanalysis Te hese include, for in for include, hese of important social important of that 42 from ). and struggle of struggle and L ( o -62 Anon. et us experi us et therwise en therwise an ideolog an , , that 1960, Nev lists by ------
CEU eTD Collection document called field, political logical, obsolete an in ing eugenics] threw to dogmas they dogmatism, genetic against that genetics against debate the describes generally “It read: be with cope Agriculture the of torate well, as position academic his from removed it present toorder in debates currentgenetic the the situationabout summaryregarding a Committee Genetic Te final stop in history the 5.1. thorities personality, of cult the Union: Soviet the and Hungary of succession the to due changes political the with explained be Marxism-Leninism,Marxism, not but cases, the or followers questions HAS the at lecture a gave and Hungary visited Lysenko that 1960 of ary Lysenko’s tio heated, not things, decide will nature of laws the and facts cool the only where genetics toward approach sonal, n expected to be expected 7 , is based on mutation on based is , experiments,something thatforbiddenwasin the early Half a year later, on March 29, 1966, the directorate of the HAS held a session discussing the discussing session a held HAS the of directorate the 1966, 29, March on later, year a Half At another place associates his and Győrfy by written summary the in Accordingly, F.Straub Bruno Secretary Section 1965, 27, September On Tirdly, . . 1965-66: “ was perceptibly was over this time inscience. teachings. teachings. of the recent past … was represented by Lysenkoism, representedby w was … past recent the of . . at to to Soviet agriculture lagging behind. Terefore, in my studied period, 1965 and 1966 would 1966 and 1965 period, studied my Terefore,in behind. lagging agriculture Soviet Igali (2002) proposed thatwasultimately proposed (2002) it Igali Lysenko ardent himself,his whodisappointed . His ideas were denounced, and the formal restoration of genetics quickly took place to place took quickly genetics of restoration formal the and denounced, were ideas His . the personal arguments as before. before. as arguments personal Soviet Academy of Sciences, Sciences, of Academy Soviet directorate. HAS the materialism dialectical is mentionused be the theoreticalframework they to lecture
the of others, head there and were some skull whose T Te report the times of the most open,
he switchhe from fashion, and artificial and fashion, Tis Tis ( res Ibid. . u cool and reserved atmosphere is atmosphereis reserved and cool lted in lted , , of the GI discussed inthis thesis discussed of the GI by 2 ) : “Te second movement second of politicogenetics “Te : the Section of Biological Sciences on the Sciences state the of Biological Section of genetics non-professionals ‘two genetic’ schools.” recognizing ‘Lysenkoist Lysenko fell Lysenkofell ly magnifying, magnifying, ly Te previous topic description, although although description, topic previous Te and of of and
yet maybe yet genetics’ afer a joint meeting meeting joint a afer along along 40 VASKhNIL, and and VASKhNIL, Vil’iams with Khrushchev Khrushchev with
will be and and also victoriouslyalso one-sided, and the constant constant the and in spite of the fact that it was in the Janu the in was it that fact the of spite in -Michurin-Lysenko approach. partly partly are
considerably difficult the of 1965 years 1966. and new new h asked Győrfy to compile with the with compile to Győrfy asked ich, ich, passing the questions to the the to questions the passing in September in s the College of the Ministry of Ministry the of College the w First by in in ere (
Győrfy Győrfy partly distorting, distorting, partly 1964, and by 1965 he he 1965 by and 1964,
cr [i.e. the first one [i.e. was Nazi where he received serious received he where S reference to personal au personal to reference ecretaries u shed!” between the the between fifies 1965 ” speech. it it
in both states, both in did not men not did b according to . It iswritten , 4) , or,otherat Tis might Tis contrast , , we can we always direc ideo was ------
CEU eTD Collection education to become professors and academicians of biology and genetics w genetics and professorsbiology academicians of and educationbecome to their ownapproach. in biased deeply equally something be politics could there than that secondly, more and biology, be Michurinist and Lysenkoismcould around there firstly, that possibilities the admit to refusing by Lysenkoism dogmas have statementseasily ward thatcould followers his and the Regarding 5.1. ceive critically evaluated” (Ibid., 12). Furthermore, isimportant that “[it comme without lef be cannot it material, educational new the in Terefore, “ that said it future, the About the previous era either, therefore rehabilitation needed” isnot tive it. geneticist not the unfortunately and theriod, debate genetic falsely str political a became of trial wrongwhich isfactually the … distorted he opinion of Marx-Engels on Darwin” ( Lysenkoabout theonly as that school “he his positioned Most of our geneticists currently standgenetics” of classical on the basis 7 measures pertaining to certain individuals due to theirto measuresindividuals certainto due pertaining In summary: administra restrictive country,significant our “In bodies, political higher of role the Regarding “ thought, people what Regarding debate], 1948 remarked the “[Aferthat Itis . support support 1. attachment attachment
to justify their to justify Critique remains the genetics, modern even or classical the of facts the biology, materialist to havebelong could which practitioners the of genetics, one only Tereis genetics. rialist Western advancor Eastern and reactionist no no is Tere thereis genetics, diferent schools. corresponding 1965 repeatedly repeatedly s , , part of our task. (Ibid., of 8–9 ourpart task. to to yet summary compiled by Győrfy Győrfy by compiled summary social social professionals working on the field of applied genetics genetics applied of field the on working professionals inquiry. As much as it was incorrect to proclaim the so called Michurinist incorrectit muchwas toAs the the called as proclaim only so as school to strayed from “strictly scientific” questions and advancement and the Soviet Union. In the conditions of the given pe given the of conditions the In Union. Soviet the and advancement other understanding other
Te switch from from switch Te Tis its scientific value” statement corresponds to the mainstream, opinion general about Not admitting as little at least; that doctoral their graduate least; and Notat little admittingas
Even though Eventhough direct direct ) ideological ideological is as incorrect, incorrect, as is idealist schools cannot appear. cannot schools idealist ‘Lysenkoist 41 the acceptance of Lysenkoist teachings became the became Lysenkoist of teachings acceptance the (Ibid., 13). the media and the official statements asserted it, statements asserted official the and media the and his associates his and authorized or stance political political
according to which, when when which, to according genetics’ (Ibid.)
o from now on, n genetic questionshappengenetic n indid and and . connotations, and used those those connotations,used and
will be will u , , ing ggle” (Ibid., 6). ggle” it clearly states that Lysenko that states clearly it faithful follower of Darwin, follower of faithful genetics, idealist or mate or idealist genetics, Te criticism of these still these of criticism Te diverted (Ibid.) as
considerably difficult … difficult considerably ntary deeply conditioned by conditioned deeply did did ] Anon. .
research re should not really really not ed, and still can, still and ed, interpretingthe the discussion , but it should be should it but , 1966, 4). adopted -
to as - - - -
CEU eTD Collection to act as if the medium between the if the “realto as medium act between world” us, and thus pot, melting one contentsinto and contextsdiferent vocabulary,same do not they sciences two the between diference receive can still they since receive thatLysenkoists. the and their of science diferencebetween acquired, I sourcesbythe Nevertheless, judging ture, he though it makes one wonder what kind of isthesory: science one science the practiceof with overtonesthe associated political and logical to efort an be to seemsthis exist, not do genetics scribing whatof sorts merit intellectual of level same ity. modaldiferent a in time however, this 1958, afer again stated also is genetics of oneness the more, by butclaim with genetics eugenics, Nazi irony of the mentionedtoof them due is theirpart tions; seeing position normality, as not occupa high-prestige admittedly such to given is environmentspace where an circumstances, social contrasting it with higher, mutually accepted accepted mutually higher, with it contrasting As I see it, i it, see I As In curious a historical T he 1966 1966 he upr support in this in understanding. as plant a or another be Tere understanding also could the of phenomena same For… instance, looking chickena at We realities. circumstances all understandingaccount kindphenomenaof all and this dialectical. of call them. togiven And the understanding phenomena of can vary. Itsuch, canbe that explanation take we possibly into the and phenomena, of understanding interpretation, the about West,but or diferently. East facts about interpret can people diferent two room, one West,in the and East the sciences natural the in that us, of all for clear is It report report just as Igali (2002) did, (2002) Igali as just n 1958, it was used for the restoration of Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology to the to restorationLysenkoism the Michurinistof for and biology used was it 1958, n is that the summary compares compares summary the that is clearly corresponding if if reinforces the political political the reinforces it were were it made value a that Tis is (Flitner 2003, 179–180) coincidence, Lysenko thealmost same said was corrupted by ideology and politics politics and ideology by corrupted was support metaphysical understanding. some fossilized thing thing fossilized some even even o to of genetics of operate withthesame natural entities. if they are deemed worthy, such a statement statement a worthy,such deemed are they if its judgment that scientific valu scientific whereas it was Lysenko first in the the in first Lysenko was it whereas are not compatible with each other, as they do not use the use not do they other,as each with compatible not are granting legitimacy. Tis time, however, by by however, time, Tis legitimacy. granting character of Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology Lysenkoism characterof Michurinist and biology between the schools: two between that the ideological, politicized nature of Lysenkoism to Lysenkoism of nature politicized ideological, the the geneticists still did not understand not discursivethe did geneticistsstill the . 42 and revered and does not change, change, not does practice there can be no no be can there
e (Lysenko 1960, ” enables described by Latourdescribed of science. It of importantnote,is that tois it that eliminating Even s if authorities as “Marx-Engels.” as authorities is not isnot yekit oto Lysenkoists that Western or Eastern science. Both in Both science. Western Eastern or 22–23) here put into is not not is ettingthatout “ six , not science itself. Tis is illu is Tis itself.science not , historical contingency historical get rid of of rid get years before at the HAS lec before years at the HAS It is again a sign of It sign a isagain altered thirties (1987) practice continue their work, their continue . Tis is one-sided is Tis . inevitably blurs the blurs inevitably the perceived perceived the deviation , who made same made who wouldexist. not researchshould some way So it is not is it So explicitly de explicitly . . unifying Further A , trying , . speck again ideo
------
CEU eTD Collection sentence intellectualinstitutionaland “ used word “concept” instead. the at arrive hardly we then stays,] (Ibid.). school” political a was certain, to related only biology Michurinist and senkoism about the “uncertainty” of the times mentioned I earlier proved tocorrect. be GI and Lysenkoism of restoration formal the Michurinistdebate, biology 1958 afer that far, so to alluded only I what verify cannot I which of truth the driven, emotionally of one as letter this consider would I mind, to thatanythingcomes continuouslythe Despite nature times,the when political of opinion, there were administrative restrictions: the to contrary that, noted he 1966, 25, February F.dated Straub,Bruno Secretary Section 1966, 1). the and netics, theschool of evaluateMarxistideology the perspectiveto applying a importancethe of ology, genetics, oneness of genetics of months A few later inJune, 5.1. again operated for a time with with time a for operated again 7.2. In spite of this this of spite In letterthatthis in noted Győrfyalso February,Nonetheless,in back restrictive, and “ Tis fght of worldviews did not restrict any biologist” by Győrfy has to represented be in the the to due April Group,monitoring 1959 28, personneltheofBiological occurred changes in the GeneticInstitute a was It that summarized summarized significantly restrictive, and and restrictive, significantly atta iln diitaietoswr o sdt ers eeisgenetics repress to used not were tools administrative violent that fact in passionate defense of genetics against against genetics of defense passionate the mistake of considering Michurinist biology as the only correct materialistcorrect theonly bi as themistake consideringof Michurinist biology that appropriate political and professional professional and political appropriate did infact did dictatorially was later was the directorate the of HAS level thatlevel genetics’, of and made the contents of the the of contents the made and happen, and Te problem with the two schools for him was that “ that was him for schools two the with problem Te curriculum. administrative completed and typed typed completed and prescribed research research prescribed Győrfy already saw the initial version saw initial the already Győrfy required dictatorially it is not correct to talk about two schools of genetics, as Ly as genetics, of schools two about talk to correct not is it ” (Győrfy 1) 1966, that afer the initial from period 1949 until 1953-54, the
purge 43 measure administrative administrative on theon bottom this of letter,there handwrittenis a of Lysenkoism” (Ibid.). Lysenkoism”(Ibid.). of standards, and and standards, curriculum released Resolutionreleased no.14/1966. on the state onto . . If it is indeed honest, then it then honest, indeed is it If s” to s”to an narrower ideological and political “ political and ideological the one had to be careful not to write downto not careful be hadto one 1966 report report 1966 vindicate its place at least on the same the on least at place vindicateits measure that, as a consequence of the of consequence a as that, measure other sideof the paper [because] . . It turned out that Győ that out turned It the most honest ones, ones, honest most the aspects of it, and “ultimately, and it it, of aspects “ official of the reportthe of the He suggested using the using suggested He Michurinist genetics Michurinist . . It highlighted the highlighted It [If the ‘school’ the [If concept” that concept” . . clearly states clearly . In a letter to Inletter a ( unless it is it unless rfy’s Ru report’s s s of ge of znyák fears
- - -
CEU eTD Collection 11 to decided finally sion ofen tion)” (A that ever, seems it document, nor internationalsection, the in neither on, so and bridization, of mention single a not is Tere lists 1966 early freedom.” “lost 1965-66? afer HAS the and GI the at happened What 5.1. ing summary of Győrfy,underworkingscientist mentioned ready whatSo aboutthat “ It reads: 8. pared topared most of the country’s institutes. com GI, the of operation exceptionallypeaceful the explain would Tis one. a such been have could Győrfy Barna It is enough for us now to knowthat to now us for Itenough is He (2002) writes: recited later on. It lasted for a whole day day whole Ita later for on. lasted recited Afer 1966; non. 1965?non. decision-makers at ministries and [and] sections, academic of secretaries the departments, university of heads institutes, research of tors tionallyrenownedprofessionals as mire, the through dragged dered, were Geneticists … apparatus centralized dictatorially party’s nist Lysenkoist doctrine, new Te a came Lysenkoismresult, a by,approvedAs be and centralprinciplesthe… on, based plans researchwithinto thought of school new the forced Tey … research and education, publications, of planningcentral the and propaganda; pseudoscientific the were genetics Lysenkoization of the of tools Te … party munist experimental but on facts, based ma not did Tey possible Fundamentally,not plane. did philosophical it the on ratheronly 1950s the of beginnings the in especially worldviews, of fight Tis says otherwise: “ otherwise: says n absolute dogma in the fields of science, education, science, of fields the in dogma absolute n An Appendix to to Appendix An the events, the most significant achievements of the progress of genetics in the last 15 years. 15 last the in genetics of progress the of achievements significant most the for, not any practicing on the biologist Michurinist based (Ibid., 2) to concept, work. and and as if as , 4)., significantly restrictive, and a a end it at one point, which was against regulations. regulations. against was which point, one at it end k one-time reminder genetics finally and irrevocably triumphed. Tere is is Tere triumphed. irrevocably and finally genetics e it it e Vernalization unless the Genetic Institute truly a was exceptional inthose times. place [i.e. Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology] biology] Michurinist and Lysenkoism [i.e. Lysenko, Michurin, or their followers, nor nor followers, their Lysenko, or Michurin, an as a a as , at least for me, unknown document, presumably from 1965 or 1965 from presumably document, unknown me, for least at , with the ideological, political, and administrative coercion of the com the administrative of coercionand political, ideological, the with authorities. persecuted, dismissed from their jobs their from dismissed persecuted, compulsory ideology, compulsory directors directors of spring wheat spring of Rajki’s who could not be substituted. be not could who provokingfuriousdebate dictatorially defense defense 44 Sándor Igali (2002) Igali Sándor
s Apparently, reached every bas every reached in 1966 in (S. Rajki., Rajki., (S. public education public administrative restrict, and maybe did not make im make not did maybe restrict,and in in threatened, oppressed, silenced, silenced, oppressed, threatened, was an infamous, memorable eventmemorable infamous, an was accepted by professional persuasion professional by accepted made itself felt here at us also, but also, us at here felt itself made the Hungarian. Hungarian. the submitted for doctoral disserta doctoral for submitted scientific research “regained” its scientific research “regained” … … would con would 11 ic Tey only lef some some lef only Tey when the
body body Lysenkoistsweredirecthe , print media, radio, etc. … etc. radio, media, print , Rajki, along with his wife, his with along Rajki, measure”? any any through the commu the through one one about vegetative hy vegetative about tend such such tend academic commisacademic entry Reading this one this Reading
One of the al listed, how listed, interna slan easy-go ------
------
CEU eTD Collection 12 deJong-Lambert Krementsov and (2012, 378) summarize Review. Literature the in mentioned reactions early those to similar very is biology Michurinist because surprising, not my work well. as that embeddedness historical and sociocultural “unconscious,” that the of importance the precisely was it ratherand than act; this providing“honest,” an “objective,” and obscurity the in others leaves and things, certain highlights ternational or domestic. moment pages. dred hun numberedseveral Archives, HAS the in it rememberseeing correctly I if alone, which tationof and time of shortage the to Due to of thecase GI To give and conclude, 5.1. 1962-63 the of director the as career,professional 1983, his vernalization of experimentsconduct end until continuedto the creates narrative a favorable to interests. certain interests Tose may conscious be or unconscious. process the whole history of the presence and perception of Lysenkoism at the GI and and GI the Lysenkoism at of perception and presence the of history whole the process 9 ments constructions. are arbitrary FrameworkTeoretical mo seriously, my since writtenin things the take I if moment such no was there course, Of I emphasized in my Teoretical Framework, Framework, Teoretical my in emphasized I Nevertheless, Nevertheless, goes, Furthermore, dialectics process-based as far as Barna Győrfy leadthe Institute until divergence . . Conclusion and (Balla 1999). (Balla 12 scientists the against senko “ Te bloc). Eastern the in satellites its (particularly regime Soviet the of victims passive upon trine “ the by steered being as events War inspired–explanationsof H , Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology were not important factors anymore in genetics, in genetics, anymorein factors important not were Lysenkoism Michurinist, biology and istorical accounts … in separate countries almost universally resorted to decidedly simplistic–Cold decidedly to resorted universally almost countries separate in … accounts istorical I I also believe that it would be would it that believe also
and Lysenkoismand afair” . It therefore diferentiates, diferentiates, therefore It . Martonvásár Agricultural Institute, Institute, Agricultural Martonvásár the image drawn from th from drawn image the was portrayed as a heroic struggle of Western of heroica struggle as portrayed was Eastern) “ (and occasionally the critique: the way leading figures at the GI and the HAS perceived Lysenkoism and Lysenkoism perceived HAS the and GI the at figures leading way the final final ‘pseudoscience’ , my, stop in196 evaluation Discourses and and Discourses my abilities, I did not intend to cover cover intend to not did I abilities, my espoused by Lysenko.
his his of the relation the of an unnecessary unnecessary an that is, it creates dualities, creates it is, that is subchapter is both surprising and not surprising. surprising. not and surprising both is subchapter is 1970 6 Scientization is an arbitrary decision as far far as decision arbitrary isan 45 and and death even though the failure was already evident in evident already was failure the though even that any history writing itarbitrary,any is much history as as . ship of ideology, of ship d it I I or even “true”even or enterprise, since since enterprise, of of , now now hand continuous, of Moscow,” of Lysenko’sforcing doc have to apply, or at least accept, to accept, least at apply,or to have ofen without acknowledging without ofen Rajki’s account whathappened,of politics, and science science and politics, directionless approximately as it wouldadvisable be as defense, the documenthe defense, true” scienceand convergence afer that afer the Ly HAS. in the in - -
It is It As It - - - -
CEU eTD Collection 13 of Lysenkoism toextent. certain a the and GI, Even writes Beck though about late postmodern 20th century, to the applied thoughts be case his can inwritingso, isdiferentiating at least, the between the lack of reasons expected. then as is, “well,” that working not history, Soviet in crisis of time particular a at cow.”emerged It conception, popular the despite (2011), Ferguson and (2008), Roll-Hansen Levins, and Lewontin and Young(1978), themselvesthey have become. to due so do to failing of conscious not, well. as duty gaze, condition, “impossible” entities contingentpositions viously ence, inmy sourcessci position, of this defending took ideal an havewe everybody Indeed,as almost seen, Or take another, Cf. something similar in S very to It is is It Literaturethe authorsin Review,enlightened morehistorically cited According the to including of example good a is WhattheGI happened at 13 and treating and
understand what Lysenkoism Michurinist and biology
most of the time time the of most , that is, is, that , engaged engaged expected, as as expected, stimulating taken line. thishas self-congratulatory subject the on read have I everything Hitherto science. value-neutral of domain the into ideology and politics of values alien intrusionthethe about Lysenkoism of cautionaryof tale a history the as sees which self-consciousness scientific liberal-to-reactionary the than deeper look] to West.necessary is [It and East both in subject the on writings the characterised has which model use/abuse crude the] is [It the this fact about itself, but both striving to reach supremacy in in supremacy reach strivingto both but itself, about fact this Out of all the 542 archival pages I read, none none read, I pages archival 542 the all of Out
exact exact it was it in in highly critical highly the slightest slightest the study context of its inception to see this through Beck’s Beck’s through this see to a temporary temporary a might might Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology biology Michurinist and Lysenkoism
uprooted, the the , , as it alienates the practitioners practitioners the alienates it as devoid of professional and human responsibility; and, to to and, responsibility; human and professional of devoid who stemfromthe incompatible incompatible cruton 2009.
are are opinion departure
deviation deviation using indeed ideological and political power, then it failed failed it then power, political and ideological indeed using diferent f diferent of this perception, from the the from black boxes they they boxes black static and to be discarded. discarded. be to and since and rom the the rom
Later (1992) 46 unwittingly inception the and export. it was exported exported was it a dualistic studied clash clash . . What the leading figures at the GI failed to do Whatfailed GI at the figures leading the perspective of science and society (politics). society and science of perspective from the world by by world the from this time it of themanycontained of between between w operate on a daily basis: the black boxes black the basis: daily a on operate , but also from the the from also but , Teir failure to realize their own deeply own their realize to failure Teir ere perception themselves scienceand of as actually socioculturally not spawned by the “hand of Mos of “hand the by spawned not when the old culture or system was system or culture old the when two discourses, neither of whichneitherdiscourses, of two due to a probably multitude of multitude probably a to due isof was was at the time. Young’s some creat conditioned, thus thus conditioned, study way, yet way,yet ing
attempt, (1978): a a itself. itself. an objectifying an certain extent, certain completely Tis is an is Tis honest orhonest due to due
ob - - -
CEU eTD Collection down. Lysenkoism emerges as as Lysenkoismemerges down. modernity true certainly is execution authoritarian Te 155) writes: also Lysenkoism that however, ing, unfinished” (Ibid.). selves them are constraints,’ … ‘objective that is suspicion Te questionable. and visible rationality tific scientization refexive precisely is It change. for mands mas’” (Ibid., 157). dog ‘new and interests political and economic through practice knowledge scientific of dalization feu a to open door the throws and claims, scientific enlightened against standpointsinterested and truth of tion more and more Firstly,“ scientization primary isfactory of Michurinist and biology. experts” geois 10) 2011, (Ferguson Levins and YoungLewontin Both and (1978), twoscientization, defines and refexive: primary Truthbook his Beyond chapterof In“Science the Enlightenment?” and Tis is exactly whatTis happened withthe Lysenkoism riseof Michurinist and It biology. interest is “ Secondly, things. other among happen, things important two scientization, refexive of consequence a As manufactured a momentous momentous a they are targeted not only as a source a notthey only are as targeted of solutions to problems, a but as also way,that In overcome. and analyze to are they which problems of and reality as of producer themselves and with product – present and past objectivized own their with confronted being now are sciences defects. products, own their with confronted are ences sci the society. phase, a refexive and In the to “given”nature, of people world applied is science first, At characteristic of modernization in industrial into society the first ofhalf twentieththe century … tarian an in advanced is scientific results of application the as time same the at generalized be science Only under experts. and the conditions of thispeople demarcation can thelay of modernity, and tradition of contrast the from dynamism its gains scientization Primary that serves as the source of dynamism; except in this case, it is a a is it case, this in except dynamism; of source the as serves that ” ” fashion in external relations. Tis constellation of an unbroken faith in science and progress is a is progress and science in unbrokenfaith an of constellation Tis relations. external in fashion the and (Beck 1992, 156). 156). 1992, (Beck even the the even necessary and thus are in principle principle in are thus and
demonopolization of scientifc knowledge claims knowledge scientifc of demonopolization “ elitist academy elitist , but at the same time, time, same the at but , foundations of scientifc rationality scientifc of foundations Focusingon the the tzarist Russia, tzarist Russia, Tis demonopolization “ demonopolization Tis dominant dominant had the characteristics of primary scientization. As Beck (Ibid., Beck As scientization. primary of characteristics the had ly on ” ” as as this aspect, Lysenkoism aspect, this becomes one of the factors contributing to the rise of Lysenkoism of rise the contributingto factors the of one of force solvable Lysenkoism, as well as the contrast contrast the as well Lysenkoism,as and and less and less sufcient less and less 47 , despite the fact fact the despite , emerges as refexive as scientization.emerges . Te project of modernity, Enlightenment, is Enlightenment, modernity, of project Te . … … that [ When When are not spared from the generalized de generalized the from spared not are makes the self-imposed taboos of scien of taboos self-imposed the makes immunizes refexive scientization happens,scientization refexive skepticism that it drew intellectual content intellectual drew it that mention the “ the mention for the socially binding defini binding socially the for comes about: science becomes science about: comes socially prevailing ideologies prevailing socially cause of problems. Risk Society Risk in the internal relations of the contrast turned upside turned contrast product attitudes of of attitudes of tradition and tradition of , he he , (Ibid., 156) of a of (1992, 155) (1992, authori ] “the n unsatn bour - -
------
CEU eTD Collection yond my competence. and aims Lysenkoism forced and theuponGI? unstable beingdue so to all simultaneously and possible, needs, opposites exact biology, individual, of image the tivate pretending t tors things the of rience them that text periencing it manipulations. political and ideological through GI the haveseen, we as difer i now, ment; Enlighten and modernity valuesof the defense a of,Lysenkoism as rejection GI the of thepart on interpretthe can we and “Western” period, and the netics of science tions “ from An equally importantquestionequally An In sum, a speaking, Dialectically Lastly,w “objective,” Nonetheless,add, shall unbroken I this in, faith is science ignore ” (Lewontin and Levins, quoted inFerguson quoted ” 2011, (Lewontin 10). Levins, and to fourish. to t is undeniably true that it was forced upon the country and, to an extent, and here accounts here and extent, an to and, country the upon forced was it that true undeniably is t
as as non-academic agricultural traditions and practices along with discredited Lamarckian traditionsconcep withdiscredited agricultural practicesnon-academic along and and and and in fact, any infact, and a a they moment scientization. of primary d direct the historical contingency of of contingency historical the hem to be contrary tocontrary the popular, at the time, however, would have much richer yielded and hy did not Lysenkoism not hydid can modify, and which can, in turn, modify the discourse the modify turn, in can, which and modify, can or enemies, enemies, or
It means, that to to Itthatmeans, belief in it. it. in belief Lysenkoism universal. school of thought of anydiscipline, thought of of school the negatives, the s discourse s In times of crisis, when crisis, of Intimes unique define implement remains,however: and Michurinist biology Michurinist and biology isolating, isolating, Answering this, however, is the task of someone else, as it is be Answering is it however, as this,else, someone of the task is heroes in history in heroes d s itself against against itself , Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology biology Michurinist Lysenkoismand ,
than Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology, biology, Michurinist Lysenkoismand Lysenkoism dualistic,
merely merely 48 possible possible Why did not the notthe did Why in the first place first the in on on , , mechanistic, exact opposites exact the success of Lysenkoism and Michurinist Lysenkoismand of success the , the the
the country would haveneeded would country the depends futures are futuresare work out at the GI? GI? theat outwork subsequent subsequent even moreeven positive resistance toward, and eventual and toward, resistance not so clear so not . No . may prove to be Hungarian perceived to be be to perceived s (the content) in order for order in content) (the equally provision of of provision t
belief belief knowing knowing Investigating, need need on theoncreation of and also their own their also and
true of of true Lookingback - cut thatc tendsto State intervened, their this, this, answers. its claims and claims its enough. constrained modernge own con own
the the propaga and on it on expe ex ul its ------,
CEU eTD Collection whether there was mystical interpenetration of interior exterior and that without was any material basis.”the replacing [thus] … world outside their governing forces the from organisms within forces the of alienation his environment,and and organism of outside, and inside of demarcation clear his in 2007 break, and Darwin later was It of thegirafe’s it wants as neck to reach the tree’s down leaves;passed to isthe nextgeneration. higher ganism. wrong. was Lamarckthat“neo-Lamarckianknow pseudoscience,” is otherall the we and all, afer netics environment the is difered definitely they which in thing one the that is assumption popular discursive a from that subchapter previous the of end the at seeing us of spite In tion will period follow,I will finally and will First I time,the domains of the environment I to pertaining GI the at biology Michurinist and Lysenkoism of perception the about only written have I far So 5.2.1. Introduction SCIENTISTS 5 nstitute. In contrast, in this subchapter, comprehensive narration is not needed anymore, anymore, needed not is narration comprehensivesubchapter, this in contrast, In nstitute. 2 .2. Terefore, it makes perfect sense to to sense perfect makes it Terefore, L Q:RQ2: a amarck assigned far greater role to the environment in the interaction between it and the or the and it between interaction the environmentin the to role greater far assigned amarck , 31 , without which further progress in biology biology in progress further without which Simplifying it, h it, Simplifying ). As Lewontin Lewontin As ).
presen H ? and organisms and OW ideology and politics vs. vs. politics and ideology t
angle, shared many things many shared angle, the“environment” theLysenkoist of side, such a diferencesuch a or not. W ERE e
propos THE (2007, 230-231) 230-231) (2007, the idea of idea the . . Tis is is Tis
ENVIRONMENT ed that easy to see, the implicit argument goes, goes, argument implicit the see, to easy aua eeto htthat selection natural and organismsand science, and narrated narrated and science, introduce the geneticists’ point of view. acquired characteristics;acquired instance, for compare the two schools of thought in order to find out find to order in thought of schools two the compare wrote, “ wrote, — and and
AND 49 would have been would I will return to this at the end of this thesis this of end the at this to return will I Darwin’sLamarckismwas from diference radical , and politics and ,
ORGANISMS then a dialectical analysis of the restorathe of analysis dialectical a then a epnil responsible was it it through historical milestones of the of milestones historical through modern genetics and Lysenkoism, and genetics modern and science science and impossible (Lewontin and Levins (Lewontinimpossibleand
CONCEPTUALIZED since since the gradual the gradual for an epistemological an for will inevitably overlap one of them is ge is them of one conception of the of conception
BY elongation and this and
PLANT — also the - - - .
CEU eTD Collection 14 gap their own, cannot defend themselves against gap, poral reinforcingfalse, used itself defines it backhand discourse a of cultivation, well. stream withLamarckism ated because beddedness th about tion Lamarckian 1). ( materialist” dialectical “instinctivelya was he as biology” materialist of “founder the as as Michurinistbiology and ism i Here vironment of the teachings the biology, Soviet and advanced worldview, materialist “dialectical the be will research biological of foundations the if succeed only steer our alist only nizes ment obvious the materialism,and dialectical ism-Leninism, First 5.2. Based on my Literature Review, if I do not accept Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology as neo- as biology Michurinist Lysenkoismand accept not do I if Review, Literature my on Based 2 Cf. Latour is is Calling it Calling biology Michurinist Lysenkoismand that say to be would that at attempt such One seriously,takenIfdialectical this by , . . approach in in approach . . As I have written in the Conclusion of the previous subchapter, subchapter, previous the of Conclusion the in written have I As sas Te indeed indeed t is is t Verysimply, “
evolutionary biology evolutionary omnal lsiyclassify mentally to that one of the of one that xmnn h fiil official the examining genetic is is an an inauguration of the ‘random and organism and . venture much 1987. understanding alternative to Darwinian Darwinian understandingalternative to e only apparent, therefore illusory, apparent,thereforeillusory, only pseudoscience or or pseudoscience other other studies as well” studies as the prevailing theory became tacit knowledge became the prevailing theory eeisgenetics less less
variations’ s it it , then the only only the then , side’s possible unconscious motives motives unconscious side’spossible denies the dialectical unity between the living and its environment, its and living the and between unity dialectical the denies polite polite problem , as anyone who who anyone as , out of and of out equally, if not more, depends on the the on depends more, not if equally, htthat discourse, the modern modern the discourse, and just, and yekimadMcuiitbooya as biology Michurinist and Lysenkoism ” ( ” early that is the negative side of the then and still thethen and of side thatnegativethe is rae created a Malthusian error, even though Darwin was very much appreciated much very was Darwin Malthusian error,though a even mysticism, and so on, on, so mysticism,and (Ibid., 5). 1950?b Anon. s with bourgeois, idealist science science idealist bourgeois, with rgamtc saeet statements programmatic fifies way to explain why why explain to way against. against. approach as as ihrns ilg,biology, Michurinist these general general these starts to read, for instance, Lewontin and Levins will see. will Levins and Lewontin instance, for read, to starts Adopting this a well-formulated a Lamarckism then is is then Lamarckism , 2). 2). , indeed alludes to an alternative an to alludes indeed achievements of advancing Soviet science, science, Soviet advancing of achievements since it seems solid only solid seems it since 50 Vil’iams As opposed to this, “ this, to opposed As evolutionary evolutionary natural selection selection natural descriptive that is, is, that they view is in the sense of unwitting of sense the in –Michurin–Lysenko” (
w f te ery early the of [and creating an apparently far greater tem greater apparentlyfar creatingan 14 ere theory absolutely necessary, provision of of provision . synthesis, terms, having inherent no and and ]i t]his the the is is , , its conception of the environ the of conception its such as such as are are creation, and now I shall add shall I now and creation, that diferent and simultaneously and diferent last point of divergence, and divergence, of point last
due due it was it leading-edge theory has to has theory leading-edge called so, remains so, called which informsas genetics which was rejected by Lysenko by rejected was generally accepted, main accepted, generally fifies to to its negative context, the context, negative its genetics. genetics. the dialectical materi dialectical the the the understanding of en understanding of Ibid.
rmtn Marx promoting linear conception linear sociocultural em sociocultural as t as , 1)., Te temporal he plans he Anon. n.d. Anon. it becomes it are stance of specula associ recog can ------,
CEU eTD Collection 17 16 15 teractions text his in somewhere note have that factors internal the precisely is it usually and emerges, factors internal and external of teraction the opinion of the opponent itself. failed that tled basis cepted ogy, early the in At anotherperiod, 5.2. der empowered, to feel either to doactual work, or on anotherto continue level, to exist at all our to duemental only the diference is kindspeculation,eitherpseudoscience, or science a of is science moment,ability, particular every a at usually while, biases; political, deeply is, that sociocultural, collective its and science, tivist is “backward” as these evolutionmetaphor its and of biological ment.” o time of 3 esadn fcuaiyisl ” derstanding itself of causality un new a as actually but emerge, object and subject interactions which thereare intra-action,through where to act, interaction,from shif usto startwhere withseparate we entitiesgets inter which they and neologism, kind of just a “And‘intra-action notion theof by what thatmean partly I is reason theformer to less, writtenin world, one világ,”where “élőHungarian the of translation literal the is world” “Living Cf. next subchapter. Furthermore,TeoreticalFrameworkhave the outlinedin I already as in connection withfalsifi Nevertheless, If we are to be consistently dialectical, then then dialectical, consistently be to are we If He(Erdélyi T explicitly attempted to use this framework. Te Te framework. this attempteduse explicitly to dialectical materialism and Marxism without “-Leninism,”without Marxism and materialism dialectical . . p Te restoration of the early he philosophical analysis of the biological quantitative and qualitative changes quantitativequalitativechanges and biological the of analysis philosophical he rimacy.” time this criticize, to more some still is there endeavor.Nevertheless, this in points crucial at Moreover, it not not for writing the words two
f begin to exist. exist. to begin Western modernity Western admitting to workto with. authenticallyof the Lysenkoist feeling and evokevocabulary the discourse 1965 Pseudoscience and mysticism are still alive traditions, as well as science. science. as well as traditions, alive still are mysticism and Pseudoscience is , 2) writes , at it probable that in fact, fact, in . In true, or some would say radical, dialectics there is only intra only is there dialectics radical, say would some or Intrue, élővilág A 1964 research1964 A that that ( Karen Barad in sixties separately usually, 15 translatesto and fora fauna, or nature. it is only through our mental and intellectual intellectual and mental our through only is it , and its consequent inventions, such as “progress” and “develop and “progress” as such inventions, consequent its and , sixties a place a these terms are afer afer the the may and and perceived directionality.perceived : “In : the movementtheof living world the the Dolphijn, van and der Tuin, 2012, supervised byGyőrfy supervised uncritical uncritical only intellectual stoppage of the fow of time and ideas, ideas, timeandof the fowof intellectualstoppage 1958 restoration 1958 be grammaticalbe convention. it would be expected from the author to to author the from expected be would it 51 used invited acceptance of the hegemony of Western posi of hegemony the of acceptance ’ as proposing a new way of thinkingway of causality. new proposing a It as not is
outof unconscious opponent frequentlyit criticized gained momentum as a mutually ac mutually a as momentum gained of Lysenkoism of Michurinist and biol I thinkbothtranslations arecorrect,I used thathaveI mentioned before, élő means living, living, means
55 ) . teleology inspired teleology of the time investigation that that investigation [ or nature világ at the same time, same the at world. Neverthe world. was was , , even though the - action such a one a such ] cautiously Rejecting 16 . , , since it since the in by the 17 in or in enti , , the in ------
CEU eTD Collection process orprocess “movement.” efects, those sufer own, its on efects” “modifying no environment has that, sions, (Ibid., 11 of efects fying ( living” the and nature] [or “Plant genetics” section, it iswritten: “ before. early the out pursued never was Tispropels me ofat honest theto belief GI. ist biology LysenkoismMichurin how and about now have we knowledge the by weakened further is which of ism processes tometabolic itself due thereforehas Michurinist remains statement the But history. organism’slife an of troller hand hand the course, the statement dualistic. becomes withoutnotewhat on careful a again, primacy exactlymeans, thenby the that“ the one the portant precaution the only separately,is it examined and named be can nevertheless which of parts of Lysenko second part of the sentence stating the primacy of internal factor internal of primacy the stating sentence the of part second It is curious, curious, Itis precaution of Unfortunately,lack such however, Te wording and context of concepts are so similar that it is very easy to to easy very is it that similar so are concepts of context and wording Te the In Nonetheless, resulting attitudes fifies [ structs around itself is actively changed … One cannot make a sensible environmental politics with the with environmental sensible politics a make cannot One con … changed it actively that is itself around structs world the environment, current its in selection natural to response in evolves species the As coevolve. they that environmentis its and organism the of codetermination the of consequence A slogan “ slogan 4 ] firstly, true interaction would be intra-action, as I mentioned before. before. mentioned I as intra-action, be would interaction firstly, true new creates variability,which … is curricul ). point of view as well, well, as view of point apparent and this one from 1964 on the same page, page, same the on 1964 from one this and , , , as it was called at the time itcalled was (Cf. as , that the environment … is significant significant is … environment the Save Anon. 1950?c Anon. however, dogmatic dogmatic without such notes or comments I can can commentsI or notes such without a the the and second, second, and this is a a is this discussion of Te five-year plan of Hungarian biological research, under the under research, biological Hungarian of plan five-year Te of discussion primacy, it is from the the from is primacy,it
Environment” As that that it cannot be decided which side this sentence plays. It is probable probable Itis plays. sentence this side which decided be cannot it that Lewontin and Levins ( Lewontin Levins and geneticists” are supposed to have, geneticists” to supposed are definite stance on the side of genetics having the DNA as the the as DNA the having genetics of side the on stance definite , 10 , are — the organism also changes that environment; this is a never ending never a is environment;this that changes also organism the missing from “interaction.” [ this is theapproximateisthis description of since, even though it is the external that induces the change, and change, the induces that external the is it though even since, 3 because, first, “ first, because, ] ). ). An important principle of t On the next page it is continued as: “Te “Te continuedas: is it page next the On inside that that inside traits as a result of the interaction of living conditions living interactionof the of result a as traits Krementsov 1997, the” 52 2007a, 34 2007a, both on the theoretical and the the and theoretical the on both environment does not exist, and second, because ev because second, environmentand exist, not does since first, since can quickly allude to a still dualistic thinking, dualistic still a to allude quickly can this induced change wonderfully manifests wonderfully change induced this only give give only thereby connecting back to the things said things the therebyto connecting back ) describe and this idea is furtherstrengthened by is idea this and there has to be be to has there equally he developmenthe of the living world 149– the benefit of the doubt, doubt, the of benefit the s assuming the sameimplicitdis : 155). s true from a Lysenkoist and Lysenkoist a from true the . . If something has primacy, has something If Soviet Soviet draw the same conclu same the draw consider the stance of something that could that something study of the the of study A C pragmatic nd secondly, the secondly, nd reative Darwin sole con sole the case the and and plane” modi - -
im on ------
CEU eTD Collection contemporary American scientists inthe quoted Literature Review. “=holism.” noted Győrfy page, the of margin Lysenko’s the of on summary principles, the beside 4), (Ibid., page next the On rea be Győrfy’s derneathcan handwritten note interaction the in emerge genetics obviouslywill stem from that, afer ism.” Darwin Creative “Soviet of description brief the in seen have we as be, to appears first it Marxismas strong of basis accepted mutually the of basis the on biology matter the on opinion own his organism. an of history environment the of role the recognize did earlier, Darwin with along myopia. theenvironment biological of unity and philosophical of fower the soil organism’ononly and could internal the factors, are process ery were Sakharov concepts)…” norm reaction and phenotype the of creation the environment (with the of importance the lighted genetics of is inthe foreground.” environment-efectthat the everywhere see we literaturegenetics, latest theof at look however,we if 39) Finally, when the we examine stance of the other we side, arrive at a 5.2. said: “According said: have we donot to my knowledge, vegetative hybrids inHungary at the moment, 4 In the 1956 “ 1956 the In A year later in 1966, 1966, in later year A that is these from gather can we things the of One He Regarding . . astoundingly inverted astoundingly It obvious isnot what Te geneticists’ side ” (Ibid.) (Ibid.) habits. momentconstructing destroyinginand every worldit at the is human the species, only not species, ery about the Soviet situation, Soviet the about , yryGyőrfy the then criticized the Lysenkoist the criticized then liberation” liberation” 1965 (Győrfy 1965 (Győrfy Te second Te second draf version of the versionthe draf of the final version version final the Tis last comment is very similar similar very is comment last Tis and howand at hereat debate, debate, — . According to the classics of Marxism, the of classics the Accordingto . apparently irrevocably condemning Lysenkoism and Michurinist and Lysenkoism condemning irrevocably apparently of living organisms and the environment”( the and organisms living of clarifying the basic questions,the basic clarifying it will study how the self- the idea c
that that “ that , 1) , in his response to previous comments, Győrfy Győrfy comments, previous to response his in is that enjoys primacy. commented that “… that commented the roles of these these of roles the movement contains the sentence: “ sentence: the contains Report of the Section of Biological Sciences on thestateon Sciences Biological of theSection of Report s that and Michurinists by reciting reciting by Michurinists and d : “ : 53 even though Győrfythough even uses relieved relieved of matter … Such an impossible impossible an Such matter … of Győrfy of the ‘environment-dogma’ the of Lysenko.” of [i.e. the environmentorganism] the the and [i.e. in its essence essence its in the classics of genetics already high already genetics of classics the gave due credit to geneticists, who, geneticists, to credit due gave —Sakharov’s similar Te further progress of genetics of progress further Te in the “development” and life “development”and the in position. to the one the to propulsive forces of ev of forcespropulsive Sakharov’s a a Anon. comment comment argument is not as not is argument the known laws of s 1966, 3). 3). 1966,
( given by then by given notion as ‘the as notion Anon. Anon. comment by
Andrei 1956, - Un as - - - -
CEU eTD Collection 18 to the “ be to assumed tual it understanding, divergence of point mentioned with “theliving” approached ism element cal” certainly “mysti some though all, at holism or vitalism not was MichurinistLysenkoismbiology that and ble the explanation of one movement.thatis Nothis countas doubt that could processes activemetabolic has still living that experimented and ined, with. organisms while life, with do to the of both as not, do they actually but things, they surface, the On thought. and sight of regime “new” the and “old” the tween discourses, “organism”“livingor organisms.” for were that surprisingall at not subchapter, previous is the it and view to thenext subchapter.But staying with the environment environmentthroughthat, and themselves;latter this organisms, and ism Tot conclude, 5.2. 5 has to say on living beings. is parts separate diferent, tionally (Williams account” own their on value have little parts rate in the sensetially that organic, [they have] result, useful to produce single that and a which co-operate parts the sepa instrument.” cal the senses: derived two with “instrument,tool, or engine word Te creatures and Michurinist and biology Nevertheless, based on this, it might signify something deeper as well. well. as deeper something signify might it this, on Nevertheless,based surprising second Te used words the between diference the is them of first Te however,surprising. are, Two things participation again condemned as again non-living non-living . . Conclusion outlook and real,” unmediated world. I amI convinced that organism . . Te dialectical materialist or or materialist dialectical Te hese small comments, both the positive ones, and the negative criticisms of Lysenko of criticisms negative the and ones, positive the both comments, small hese invisible; while at the same time, same the at while invisible; s do not possess, possess, not do as to why as Afercontinuous transformations, is long gone, gone, long is sees appeared in English English in appeared
was was the environmentthe myopic, holistic dogma there. Lysenkoism favored “ Michurinist and biology matter matter , serve as clues to how geneticists, including Győrfy,includinggeneticists, thehow conceptualized to clues as serve , everything is mediated through the experiment, yet this mediation is mediation this experiment, yet the through mediated is everything . . is that they produce movement. movement. produce they that is this isnot are embodiments of static text-book definitionsstatictext-book of embodiments are I would say that the mysticism was in the beholder,thatthe say mysticismthe in that would is, was I It is unknown to it, because, because, it, to unknown is It a very similar to the the to similar very a Taking a reverence unknownreverence a is is related first first and and into in the the in an accident,an but it indicates the fundamental diference be to this to organisms organisms Lysenkoist Lysenkoist account everything thataccount haveI everything written until about now se in 1923, 1923, in 17th century. 17th Its root, the resultthe are black boxes.“ black are 54 s . what the what diference. diference. abstract ‘instrument’ – agency agency abstract ‘instrument’– Bertrand Russel described machines as “[they are] essen“[they are]machines as Bertrand Russel described 1985 alike at the interface of the laboratory.interfacethethe at of alikeac Te to Western to since science discourse and organisms and s atomistic, reductionist thinking I criticized earlier criticized I thinking reductionist atomistic, , , it of 227-229). 227-229). considering the considering the of One LysenkoismMichurinist and biology are strongly believed to be be to stronglybelieved are Even if its body does not move, the move, not does body its Evenif used used organ Te living” at least have least atsomething living” Te Tis conception of a system with func with system a of conception Tis thought thought appeared in the 13 the in appeared “the living,” while geneticists while living,” “the now, movement” much so properties of living things living of properties It is not entirelyimpossi not Itis [emphasisadded], afer the Literature Re will be theconnection be will “objective,” text-book 18 at least least at , ready to be exam be to ready , refer to the same the to refer th , and meant meant and , Darwin, Darwin, applicable Lysenko and musi and . the an ------
CEU eTD Collection not uniquelynot is gaze unwittinglyselves through of environment,the definition the that objectifying see the will we how asking by one, this to complementary a subchapter,final the Tis is the same same the is Tis reserved for geneticists reserved professional, objectifying gaze that I have mentioned before, and as we move to move we as and havebefore, mentioned that I gaze objectifying at all . 55 humans (scientists) defined them humans(scientists)defined -
CEU eTD Collection 20 19 ture of plants animals.” and purposeful the is he Michurin, with along traditions, Michurinist on based genetics; materialist dialectical as well as thereon, based methods practical the and plants of ment 1898. 29. ment of plants, and the thatwith … studied be of good (Ibid.). the for nature living change to them enable that methods scientific with from separated be cannot biology ist created with problem the of image an has plan five-year Biological Te 5.3.2. sive of analysis the obvious,seem itafer comprehen the will indeed, latedifficult; the on reasons, be through not will it early aspects, environment the organisms and scientists interpreted how GI, the Finally,a 5.3.1. Introduction ENVIRONMENT 5.3. Cf. the previous note. Te Hungarian is original Tere is one peculiarity in this case: out of my sources, only the programmaticthestatements theonly sources, my of of out case: this in peculiarity one is Tere Another source, a source, Another Inthe RQ3: RQ3: fifies Living the 11th thesis
by what fer discussing how Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology w biology Michurinist Lysenkoismand how discussing fer Te birth of Lysenko. of birth Te “ purposeful [in a planned a fashion [in purposeful mention anything about humans W Tematicplan” man scientists HAT ? crucial in the discourse of Soviet agriculture. agriculture. Soviet of discourse the in crucial bourgeois biology bourgeois fifie
WAS how n entry of a of entry n thought about humans society. and s.
this THE tervszerű section listingsection insertion of insertionof alteration isinherited.”
ROLE – – were perceived, we will look at how, at look will we perceived, were , the, literal translation of which would “plan-like,” be merely enough dedication to this subject, which directly alludes to alludes directly which subject, this to dedication enough merely the ideological and political political and ideological the
biological calendar calendar biological Trofim Denisovich Lysenko is is TrofimLysenko Denisovich
is that “it “it that is OF pragmatics appropriate
HUMANS the tasks to be be to the tasks 19 and society,and afer that, ] human activity.” denies that new new that denies 56 , and arms researchers and practical professionals practical and researchers arms and ,
AND factors, how it is possible to to possible is it how factors, writes writes
SOCIETY carried out, it is written“It is 5): carriedout,it (Ibid.,has to ( Anon. n.d. Anon. In contrast, the “advancing Michurin features of their profession,their featuresof As the plan says ( says plan the As plant and animal formations can be can formations animal and plant
the founder of the stage develop stage the of founder the there only specu can I isnothing. IN ere in connection with all previous all with connection in
THE introduced and practiced at practiced and introduced , 4) ,
NATURAL 20 or “in plan-like a manner”. about Lysenko: “Sept. Lysenko: about transformer of the na the of transformer control Anon. 1950?b Anon.
h the AND the the people …” people
then then
develop SOCIAL how , , 2 ), ------
CEU eTD Collection with others, the conclusion is: “ others,conclusionis: with the men that ‘humanity,’ his man realises other ‘human his directing nature’” consciously and transforming of activity the through is it since ‘political’ sentially point ence outward…” directed withoutactivity an developed (Ibid.). and realised be cannot it ‘individual,’ but is individuality constituting elements the of synthesis the its capacities and inthe and most form fruitful the modify personality. their create men thatways three delineates ifesto inhis Engels, 20th century Early 5.3.3. theand Union” Soviet debate], T other. each from indistinguishable became theirs and attitude Marxist original socialism Soviet line dividing political its in least mentioned that Western lacks science it.” change to is however, point, Te world. the derstand Marx’s Review, Literature the in tioned plan the now,Byabout idea have an we he report report he lk,-like, Considering the origin of this this of origin Consideringthe Knowing that the human essence is not inside but but inside not is essence human the that Knowing Now,“ since is stating man thatAfer Gramsci: ManGramsci: isthe ensemble relations, of social the conqueror of material forces
and relatedand authors,renders the of Lysenkoist acceptance the became teachings change vocabulary at the nexus of the internal the nexusexternal,the at of “ and and ensemble by Prison Notebooks the Section of Biological Sciences on the state of genetic of state the on Sciences Biological of Section the . . iigntr,nature, living [the idea that] ethical ‘improvement’ is purely individual is an illusion and an error: an and illusion ‘improvement’ that]ethical an [the idea is purely individual is Lysenko and his followers also aligned themselves to this teaching, so muchthat so Lysenko themselves the this to aligned teaching, followers his and also Marxisttheoretician, of the concrete conditions for realising [ realising for conditionsconcrete the of , to the satellite states; states; satellite the to , in any context context any in ( Anon.
“conceived as the the “conceivedas that 1966, 6). In reality, though, it was implicitly admitted thathuman implicitly admitted ‘nature’ was In it reality, though, was control also also man later basic tenet of the the of tenet basic later a very similar very a ; ; due to Marxism being one of the foundatio the of one being Marxism to due ofers surprising of man on insights theat the image GI. Soviet, orSoviet, “Eastern” it too. lacks science , , of the age, the key key the age, the of transformer transformer 11th thesis on F on thesis 11th activist,and this ” ensemble (Ibid., 360).
57 image of manof into image image of man man of image of the nature the of politician Antonio politician Gramsci, O of social relations” social of gained gained e (Ibid.). [for] this reason one can say thates say can is man one reason this [for] ne of them is is them of ne uerbach I Soviet Soviet n this aspect, it is not not is it aspect, this n expressions and words Man is therefore imagined Man thereforeis imagined trial of oneself was in the, let us us let the, in discourse that was also exported, at exported, also was that discourse : “ : . . attachment eealall Tese almost predestined to become become to predestined almost Philosophers have sought to un to sought have Philosophers ] to the extent of extentthe of to ] a n n precisely “ precisely elaborate s
of 1966: 1966: of (Gramsci 1971, 359), he 359), 1971, (Gramsci follow follow simplify it simplify to As it is written in the writtenin is it As philosophical man philosophical are: are: social social the the ns ns by contributing by to building on Marx, buildingon “[Afer the 1948 the “[Afer from of of reverence reverence can one’s to be be to the theory of theory the advancement , interaction , be created, be , as I men I as , own lim own a
confu at all at a ------
CEU eTD Collection 21 forcesame that Lysenkoism propelled well as Michurinist and biology Tis but showy, never modesty, good, and manners.” kulturascience, and emphasizedpunctuality, technology of businesslike cleanliness, directness,polite called sometimessimply was which ethics, social of code new senta “ collectivization: Promethean this man of Other qualities humans5.3.4. Designing society; and lates with the implications of these thoughts. 367). (Ibid., content” potential ex its has all it pressed before end an to comes society no … and being; into coming are or exist already not do omy since, him, stop to enough terial forces isone way, the most important, (Ibid., indeed and of361). conquest of personality” materialmanofand withinthe Terefore, forces.individual not butthe ma unity the conquest inof solution already exist or at at in least the process of formation” (Gr its for materialconditions the when only arises itself task the thatfound be always will closely, matter more it the at looking since, solve; can it as tasks such only itself sets Tereforealways mankind itself. society old the of womb the in matured have existence their of conditions material the before appear never production of relations higher new, and productivethe “No there developed; haveorderall perishesit forceswhich in for room before eversocial is been 21 In essence, essence, In Creating this man was re- : “no society poses for itself problems the necessary and sufficient and itselfproblemsconditions for “no solution poses the for whose : necessary society design of man man of design scious, rational, scientific criteria. con to according but accident, historical and custom by not designed, society engineered artificial, an of conceive to possible was It … it perfecting ward to- view a with transform and manage might of society to d a of society descriptionsimplified a from step small a but It laws. was social into elaborated Statisticalwere facts by those principles. (Bauman statedesigned a into building) of process the in exploited workersand oppressed the withoutthem, without society (and particularlya factories, without machines, without to the build capitalists eager society any usher to directly proceed could one upon, agreed and knownnature) trolover well were con more machines, more factories, (more society good organized, rationally a of principles the As Te scope of intervention was potentially endless. Society became an object that the state the that object an became Society endless. potentially was intervention of scope Te man’s Te Te destiny is to transform material to destinyis ‘new e and sign and manipulation and sign of society, with its improvement in … mind to be achieved toachieved be society was was society
echoing Marx’s echoing to Preface man’— 1992, 166) 1992, the Bolshevik specialist, engineer, or functionary engineer, or specialist, Bolshevik the
(Ibid., 92) controlling nature accompanied by the re-design, transformation of nature, nature, transformationof re-design, the by accompanied is collected by Scott Scott by collected is by consciou Te language of of language Te 58 A ContributionA CritiquethePolitical to of Econ s design: s forces including natureincluding forces a msci 1971, 367). msci 1971, (1998, (1998, mentioned mentioned kultura 195 : ) when writingSoviet when about ) . Incult the keepingwith. the five-year plans corre plans five-year the , and and , no no — obstacle is real is obstacle came to repre to came - -
the - - - - -
CEU eTD Collection ics also presentics also at the GI, iron of modern ideal ( plenty” nineteenth-century, andthe steam modernization: of name the in naturalresources and social lizing whatprecisely Lysenko’s caused fall Levins and tin for sons “ as described be could indeed 167). (Ibid., unpredictable” the spontaneous, irrational, the the chaotic, the of shred last the of purified streamlined, modernity In this sense, “ Communism, self: It Hungary. including states, satellite to exported later this that however, understand, to crucial is It 5.3.5. Contrary to Western society and culture Westernculture to and Contrary society Regarding practical implementation, practical “ Regarding Modernity their ascendency their new limits their limits new consumptive was to of measured be capacities.society and by needs Te goodness its economy,anced catering of the needs for population—not all economy an pushingand beefing to up of society a not was this wrong. Its of Reason—now! “Kingdom was: war cry mistrust this proved history till wait to prepared it was Neither millennium. the to way the find to history trust not brother,did elder unlikethe it But desires. and humanneeds nature to dination of ultimatethe subor of idea the by and natural necessity and historical awaywithdoing society of tas breathtaking visthe by awe-struck was modernity,and of prospects and promises wonderful the in trust family the in shared wholeheartedly brother,it impatient and Socialism’shotheaded younger, trators was in order. critique, at ping denunciations,corrupt adminis and inept instantof prodding—wherean dismissal stop charges: and the from conclusions draw to inefficiency failing socialism of mismanagement, socialism Communismaccused that wastefulness. with values progress modern modern of shared administrators those capitalist of the name charged the in was It society. industrialized oughly thorand rationally managed designed, carefully a be cansionate only convictionsociety that good a pas its in modern thoroughly was communism plenty), of society a and nature of transformation the progress, technological of values modern the in believers staunch other all (and socialism Like [c]ommunismmostits inwas mostandposture; modernity determined decisive mood (Ferguson 2011, 10) 10) 2011, (Ferguson as communismas are probably found among the factors listed by Young by listed factors the among found probably are
(Ibid.) Te peculiar Te growth Bauman chaotic,”“irrational,” “spontaneous,” : Teultimate: subordination of nature to human later …, but a society of of society a but …, in the Literature Review. Nonetheless, in general terms, it was it terms, general in Nonetheless, Review. Literature the in , 169)., . ity is, of course, that Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology Michurinist and Lysenkoism that course, of is, ity [it] was a system onesidedly adapted to the task of mobi of task the to adapted onesidedly system a was [it] that was a a was 59 bred bred stability not a a not ” (Ibid.) was the discourse of the modern synthesis genet synthesis modern the of discourse the and and uniquely Soviet Soviet uniquely the project of modernity, modernity, of project the equilibrium and “ and , one of a steady, a well-balof one , unpredictable”; unpredictable”; phenomenon, which was which phenomenon, (1978) (1978) s civilization and Lewon and yet ------the rea the -
it - - - - -
CEU eTD Collection models organisms environmentand the and society; and research, my of strands finally,three connecting the And 90) Another Modernism:5.3.6. High Tepoint of convergence proval. sources; peculiar the explains Tis genetics. the between ence (Ibid., 168). own” their as recognized readily haters capitalist its even which era modern of ideals same Insummary, “ : Tis means that, afer all, all, afer that, means Tis : silence is is silence characterization of th of characterization suit interests his is preserve and perhaps safety his the modernism…. keystone of high natureman’sto tame was to destinyit that belief Tis … faith. their to central remained that bition transform man’sto natureambition suitlimitless nearly to a with am began purposes—an they self, habits human of and moderniststherefashioning social imagine of came to Althoughhigh nature it ciety, it and intended to impose them. so new extensive a with prescriptions for began state high-modern [T]he activity.human of … field particularly a every in … thus applied be might scientific progress is and technical of benefits the modernism how of vision sweeping High laws. natural of understanding scientific with commensurate nature) human (including nature over control increasing an least, not and, needs, human of order, satisfactiongrowing social the of rationalproduction,design the of expansionthe knowledge, supreme continued self-confidence about linear progress, developmentthe scientific of technical and untilWorldWestern 1830 in roughly NorthAmerica from War a in Europe centerwas and its At I. industrialization with associated were that progress technical and scientific in beliefs the of version muscle-bound) say even might (one strong a as conceived best is It then? modernism, high is What growing richness spectacularity and of its consumptive display. (given, “objective”, gratificationneeds of productive of performance,degree the by the by not finite), [t]he communist state, in its own admittedly unprepossessing way, seemed to serve theunprepossessing ownadmittedly communist[t]he serve way, its state, to in seemed agreement elementary conceptions and relations of Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology, and Lysenkoism relationsMichurinist of biology, and and conceptions elementary , or or , e modernist e ignorance because of of because ignorance both silence of geneticists’ at the concept of humans and society in my in society humans and of concept the geneticists’at of silence being the products of modernity, there is no no is there modernity, of products the being endeavor is is endeavor 60 — true true thesubject’s the “ the both both ideology and and ideology High Modernism” Modernism” High (Ibid., 167 of
the Western the and
unimportance.Either way, is it ) politics, and science; humans science; and politics, ( of Scott ( Scott of Ibid., 94–95) (exported) (exported) significant difer significant 1998, 89- 1998, - - - -
Soviet ap - -
CEU eTD Collection precede him? precede w “liberation” the great debate,endingthe senko’s is it that plausible highly seemed it true, come dream modernist high another farms, maize brid with the of support fall first his from recover Lysenkowill 1953, March in Stalin of death the afer that obvious Was it Science’” ation Biological inSoviet “ 1948? yet power absolute in 1948, merged still are contents and context and questioned, continuously are they close, boxes black the before the futureof view of the point past; of points Tese of myriad a through unwittingly taken routes ogy, term,(1998) of point the From 5.3. [i]n the course of … work, … was transformed into a twenty-two-page treatise transformed was entitled twenty-two-page intothe Situ … work, ‘On a … course of the [i]n as itobvious as thatLysenko will 7 W as it obvious that Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology will be introduced in Hungary? In Hungary? in introduced be will biology Michurinist and Lysenkoism that obvious it Was and modernand genetics
. Legibility; and history inthe making history and Legibility; . and this latterthis and when created It was not, Itnot, was turn to move. to turn (Latour 1987, 5, 13). liminary draf of his report to the forthcoming meeting. Stalin attentively read the text, edited it, edited text, sentand it with back numerousthe corrections (Ibid.,read suggestions. and attentively Stalin meeting. forthcoming the to report his of draf liminary same subject—“On the Situation Science”. in Soviet Biological On July Lysenko 23, the sentbiologists,” Stalinon preLysenko, a Marxist the of one of “report a with VASKhNIL of meeting a hold to s ometime between July 10 and July 20, the Politburo decided not to issue it. Instead, it was decided was Instead,it it. issue to not Politburo the decided 20, July and 10 July between ometime ovrec n and convergence finally aferfinally rebuilding legibility as-n-fc his hc ntr turn in which chains, cause-and-efect as the VASKhNIL conference was initially intended to be only a resolution, whicha only VASKhNILbe theto intended initially as conference was view of view quality of historical change is why is historicalchange of quality Khrushchev? It mesmerized was afer Khrushchev though by the not, was US hyKhrushchev?
Wa . In. . . Was it obvious that Lysenko will achieve such a supreme power in August in power supreme a such achieve will Lysenko that obvious Wasit s it s
this aspect, aspect, this situated in it, the regime, however, this was was this however, regime, the divergence, some of them with definite connections in content to the to content in connections definite with them of some divergence, then obvious that obvious then , seem , ever ever war (Krementsov 1997, ed fall fall High Modernism,High to be be to bombings, it certainly did not see not did certainly it bombings, be it it thein UnionSoviet be or Hungary manifestliberation until Lysenko’s 1965? in fall final again obviously obviously ? the For of course. thehopeful, 61 oiclual odtoe,cnign contingent conditioned, socioculturally
1956 Revolution will will Revolution 1956 events, which are arbitrary construction events,arbitrary are which connected connected teghndtethe strengthened 167), then with both only about control, that is, to use use to is, that control, about 168) in a clearly delineated context delineated clearly a in LysenkoismandMichurinist biol m occur preference for preference And that will Khrushchev so, so, , was was , since Lysenkosince wasnot just just one of the one of possible f ive monthsafer ive
certain new certain decisions. -
Finally, Scott’s s from s . . But Ly - - - -
CEU eTD Collection nity, illusory, is way this gained legitimacy the Nevertheless, Furthermore, of communism the fall Lysenkoism) (and of moderni the infact, fall was similarly to for legitimacy of source irrevocable ently on the assumptions and actors their and ships Instead, organisms. environmentand and ety; structuretripartiteof the constitutedof longer this for conclusion a As 5.3. 8 If this is true, then then true, is this If . Conclusion. outlook and the West rid of its more even own and got importantly, past, of responsibility: its feeling the spectacular collapse of the communist system. No more guilty conscience. No scruples. No scruples. No its to conscience. descended has guilty past Te enjoyment. more individual contaminatingcommitments supra-individual No system. communist the of collapse spectacular the by repair beyond compromised as been have practices modern precepts motivate) say (some moral legitimize to such used justice—all shared for collectively strive to commandment the problems, social as tragedies personal view to tendency the survivals, single for commonly provide to duty the fate, individual for communalresponsibility of principle the engineering, Social exorcised. been has modernity of communism,With ghost the … arrogance. modern and dream modern the to farewell last the past; passing its of own celebratingaway official theWhatfact is intoday afuentthe westis nity. of ambitions and dreams the from retreat final the signalled communism of fall the short, and meaning its derives everything and a of chance to lef is nothing planning, which in order shaped with deliberately and supervised transparent, spontaneity monitored, replacing of management, global of ambitions the ultimate of the frustration well as demonstrated it benefit; human sensible any assigned be not could as dencies ten unplanned its among such neutralizing or disregarding while require, may satisfaction human of dream grandiose the of downfall the also was it agents; human of activities uncoordinated and difuse from emerging of instead reason of rules the follows that one setting, their and actions human of arrangement all-embracing signed, a of project the for defeat resounding a was communism of fall Te ment. improve and overhaul an of need urgent in instead be may it that orders; conceivable of just most entirelyneitherstill the fawless, nor be may viable, more technically if even capitalism], e. [i. regime this that suggestion any moreover, discredits, it that market; consumer the and freedom of regime the of superiority unchallengeable the about doubts any advance in disqualifies and lifeform of our of Other” “the as (construed communism of discrediting practical the that … assumed widely is It grave in disgrace. (Ibid.,grave in disgrace. the
(Ibid., case of communismcase capitalism. Bauman and As (1992, 177) wr 178) , as the the as , as the fall of Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology biology Michurinist Lysenkoismand of fall the inferences of
on the stage of modernity, modernity, of stage the on whole whole negative 180) chapter totality which injects meaning intomeaningour injects which totality world zeitgeists. , a diferent diferent a , the the remaking raison d’etre raison hegemonic reign of the the of reign hegemonic we can can we ideology and and ideology 62 nature—forcing it to yield ever more of anything of more ever yield to nature—forcingit view emerges emerges view or from the vision of a harmonious totality. In totality. harmonious a of vision the from unknowingly unknowingly also as as by by see these three three these see politics, and science; humans and soci humansand science; and politics, getting rid of communism, or moder or communism, of rid getting f rom these perspectives perspectives these rom total order total positivity modern modern on strings in a system system a in strings on became the the became constellations of relation of constellations ), pre-emptsbyproxy ), —an artificially de artificially —an synthesis and genetics, and synthesis ites really existing really : absolute, absolute, ty moder : that - founded - - -
appar is no is - - - -
CEU eTD Collection ‘ even thing nating perhaps from the time of Descartes. biology Michurinist coming the absolute, hegemonic, totality,”“negative ers’ the on tion move, every our watch to others Without itself,and always becoming circles. West the and on both strong so was “contaminating”science politics from fromthe not beginning, though perfectlyexplain; could Tis interesting’ How question a to ask the explain not does this Nevertheless, “ in the West, the the in now and [ dictate But t But our contingentour derivinghistory,our in self-definition, because its essence from place the know what efects such freedom may bring: we can learn little from history, since it knows of no of knows it similar situations. since history, from little learn can we bring: may freedom such efects what know in enjoy on now construing “thetoken,sameby the itself itsand, defining of in from other” identity.own will not really do We life of form this freedom unprecedented the is alternative communist theof situation One aspect inthewhichwestern found hasform life of itself afer thecollapse theof ” ( he danger of removing the “Other” and responsibility, is is responsibility, and “Other” the removing of danger he s] Lewontin 2007, 229). not only the form of our answers to questions but which questions are allowed to be to questionsquestionsallowed areanswers ourwhich to but form of the only not , , the answer to which which to answer the (Ibid., 183) backhand, cease backhand, which the one without alternatives r est of the the of est genetic cannot totality. ask beyond itself? beyond ask and to answer for our actions our for answer to and could be be could planet Tis is an understandingTis isan of the world s to exist. exist. to aversion aversion 63 as well well as the dualistic, reductionist reductionist dualistic, the from politics politics from Te result is that w that is result Te : to a great degree great a to and this is important;this is and before the fall of Lysenkoism of fall the before a totality that rewrites history rewrites that totality a , , e have lost o lost have e through “development.”through there is no need for refec for need no is there in in way of thinking origi thinking of way Hungary in geneticist in Hungary
that why pervades every pervades u r selves by be by selves r the aversion
oth and
It - - - - -
CEU eTD Collection to be of order the and investigated, questions research of and in about thinking and themaking; in Foucault’s Michel the to in TablesSee 2.2 2.1 for and more information. out of Sciences HungarianAcademyof the and humans of role the organisms; environmentand I discourses the of points crucial the secondly, and by at the GI; ology riod fromism the Michurinist point and of view biology 196 and 1948 between period the in ences writing and ating, about, science. today, maystillstudied serve thatworth are they thesetopics as by prompted was paper Tis OVERVIEW 6.1. Conclusion6. which the the As I I As By T questions, research three proposed I these, at arrive to order In Terefore, at looked thesis Correspondingly,this through two objectives: firstly, by objectives: two through M more eight e aims and objectives and aims e data that found, I letit leadme I toward conclusion, a taking up an interpretivist epistemological approach, and and approach, interpretivistepistemological an up taking OTIVATION hypothetical I I wrote in the beginning of the first first the of beginning the in wrote dr productive, it enabled me to reachmore as a complete, interconnected conclusion. archival boxes, e w extensively Latour upon (1987) various and essays by Lewontin, Levins. and my aim was was aim my these deconstruct, ,
manifestation of science. politics ingenetic by using using by AIMS a total a of 71 unique documents , Archeology of Knowledge of Archeology understand to w an an OBJECTIVES dialectics ere interest in Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology, and the the and LysenkoismMichurinist biology, interest in and though not in theDerridianin notsense, though investigating t achieved through archival research research archival through achieved between May May between found myself facing. Tese pertained to the the to pertained Tese facing. myself found investigating the presence of Lysenkoism and Michurinistbi Lysenkoism and of presence investigating the . Tese Tese . the history of plant genetic research research genetic plant of history the , 6 the Genetic Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sci of AcademyHungarian the Instituteof Genetic the , and examined the presence and perception of Lysenko perceptionof and presence the examined and , RESEARCH sub he he intentions chapter of my Findings, Findings, my of chapter 64 and s and scientists’ personal 7 of (1969), (1969), subsequent and and scientists, from both of the sides “afair.” o ciety ciety
28 QUESTIONS originating from1947 1969. and between derived derived , during which I collected 542 A4 pages A4 542 collected I which during , I set set I in the social and natural environment;natural and social the in and thisand resulted inchanging subchapters. subchapters. as
out applying applying warnings for those engaged in crein thoseengaged for warnings from my Teoretical Framework,Teoretical my from
the traditionally perception of it. to uncover history and science and history uncover to which comprehensibly covered comprehensibly which , conducted at the Archives of Archives the at conducted
AND I relied on the documents the on relied I discourse analysis similar analysis discourse In the end, t end, the In
M in the the in ETHODOLOGICAL conception of the of conception dualistic, binary dualistic, mentioned realization, his proved his the order pe - - - - -
CEU eTD Collection in 1966, resulting outrage. in an My investigation before ended t cut past. the of mistakes the admitting a and Marxism, accepted mutually the only leaving discourse, the from disappeared research; biological followed; be Lysenko”to direction personality, of cult the of curriculsearch Lysenkoisminstead, more, Michurinist and biology than merits intellectual of level same litical climate declared. officially Lysenkoism of (Ibid.) in came first genetics. to favorable Section Academic another of sion research the despite ertheless, powerin matters, agricultural conviction.honest VASKhNILout Aferof 1948 the GI conference, where Lysenkosupreme gained history, factual Regarding 6.2. to make in results A fer the Introduction, Methodology, Teoretical Framework, and Literature Review chapters, the chapters, Review Literature and Framework, Teoretical Introduction,Methodology, the fer and easy easy and Afer Lysenko’s second and final fall in 196 in fall final Lysenko’s Afer and second the With by followed Michurinistbiology Lysenkoism and restorationof formal A approximately lasted until period 19 Tis S UMMARY formalistic materialism dialectical
comprehension curricul the the matter; matter; Findings were presented were Findings for the it turned worse, as out at the 1958 Genetic Debate. 20th Congress Congress 20th um
OF um . Few months later, however, the 1956 Revolution changed the ideological and po and ideological the changed monthsFew later, Revolution however,1956 the
by the addition of vegetative hybridization, smaller, and related THE the defense of a doctoral dissertation by a life-long Lysenkoist was still to come to still Lysenkoist life-long was a dissertationby doctoral a of defense the dramatic events described by Igali (2002), the GI only had to partly modify its modify partly to had only GI the (2002), Igali by described eventsdramatic
more practical. HISTORY previously highly personalized concepts, such as the “ the as such concepts, personalized highly previously Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology w biology Michurinist and Lysenkoism of the Communist Party Communist the Party of his teachings were to satelliteteachings states, exported his including Hungary.
a OF Te exuberant celebration celebration exuberant Te espoused June 1956 that of genetics’ of that
and merged merged and PLANT in its place.
by, for instance, instance, for by, 53
GENETICS meeting 4 - 65 5 -65 4, when the GI was transferredsupervi the was under GI the when 4, with were to wereto , , liberation indeed happened, with a resolution a with happened, indeed liberation . Te latter was not banned or restricted any restricted or banned not was latter Te . in the Soviet Union Soviet the in , wherethe ,
corresponding analyses and refections, refections, and correspondinganalyses Te “liberation” from the “dark phantom”“dark the “liberation”from Te
AT have
THE the the of freedom freedom of h is point. their now rightful, legit place in re in place legit rightful, now their 1950 GI GI break with the previous years was previousyears withthe break ere never widely practiced at the at practiced widely never BETWEEN Five-year plan of of plan Five-year was, however, not a a however,not was, , and the the and , elevating them to the to them elevating 1948 1948 Vil’iams topics successive successive AND . -Michurin- Hungarian 196 purg clear- Nev so as so 6 e - - - - -
CEU eTD Collection and thediscourse of and modif later was and it, to birth gave that context discursive exact the of lack the to due was it that state to (Ibid., 157) principle [ [came] biology Michurinist and senkoism biology Michurinist of problems and overcome and are whichto they analyze of reality producer and product themselvesas with present– and past objectivized own their with confronted boxesblack they in supremacy reach to striving of ple politicogenetics,” sonality school…” … debate academic Soviet great highlighting research genetic and biological of achievements date to up the ( science” value-neutral of domain the into ideology and politics of values alien the of intrusion the initial the just mentioned, the presence of Lysenkoism a not was Regarding 6.3. Young t ] he suspicion is is suspicion he Finally, asking of thethisExamining consequences process, built I how show to attempted I analyses, In my Lysenkoism sum, In Te RQ1: RQ1: ied a about” ( about” clash clash ” ( 1978). 1978). scientists’ by it in a never-ending dialectical process. In summary, by refecting refecting summary,In by process. dialectical never-ending a in it by ( solvable Ibid., international scholarly opinioninternational scholarly Anon. 1956 h on Beck’s (1992) refexive scientization concept, whereby “ whereby concept, scientization refexive (1992) Beck’s on H . ow ow late and and late OW between between Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology biology Michurinist Lysenkoismand ideology and and ideology 9 Ibid. operate
. . ). ( DID [ perception of of perception Győrfy [With these, [With that w ideology and and ideology hy Lysenkoismhy ) were as scientific phenomena. With With phenomena. scientific as were now already obsolete authorities in biology” biology” authorities in obsolete already now
, , IDEOLOGY , , ] two discourses, neither of which which of neither discourses, two along with with along 30)
d that and Michurinist biology biology Michurinist and on a daily basis: the boxes black themselves onthey dailybasis: a bec 1965
Genetics research “ was ‘objective constraints,’ … are themselves themselves are constraints,’‘objective … politics ] b some ensured not a scientific but primarily a political victory to Lysenko’sto victory political a primarily but scientific a not ensured
, , it [
politics, and science at the GI, at science the and GI, politics, 2 t] AND , however, however, , questioning “e questioning , ) he project of modernity, Enlightenment, Enlightenment, modernity, of project he “ and Michurinist biology Michurinistbiology and
thebeing first eugenics. Nazi way, yet yet way, infuence oetu momentous a
POLITICS , which which excluding the things that things the d completely plant I I 66 e h the ven considered considered
found that what fitted it perfectly INFLUENCE impeded by impeded w ere demonopolization of scientifc knowledge claims knowledge scientifc of demonopolization were were major issue at the GI.
genetic genetic a few, noted noted few, a considered to be “the “the be to considered conscious of conscious failing to do so due to to due so do to failing foundations of scientifc rationality, … … rationality, scientifc of foundations refexive scientization, and scientization, refexive c onvicted as a period of “ of period a as onvicted happened at the GI GI the at happened Lysenkoism as a “cautionary tale about “cautionarytale a Lysenkoismas did not not did research, research, [and] dogmatic
PLANT I foundI ” ( (Beck 1992, 156).(Beck Győrfy Győrfy … the distortion of those, those, of distortion the … cases this fact about itself, but both but itself, about fact this work out at the GI, GI, the at out work manufactured
apart from the factual things factual the from apart GENETIC
that the sciences are now being now are sciences the prejudice or , , strongly corresponded to corresponded strongly 1956, 36) 1956, t a he success of Lysenko of success he [remains] me. o second movement of movement second n the factual history factual the n
were RESEARCH h the Lysenkoism and and thus are in are thus and total total
the . “ . the the a good exam good a incompatible In 1948, the In1948, unfinished” cult ofcult I I rise rise neglect ventured ? of Ly of with per [as
of ] - - - -
CEU eTD Collection omri h the in former it.” change to is however, point, Te world. the derstand Marx’s Review, Literature the in tioned plan of image the constituted of this question. point, this with, work to material Regarding ENVIRONMENT 6.5. Darwin. at least since ence experiment, the laboratory; the of interface the that conclusion the drew I which from sentations, of “instinctivelywas materialist” dialectical a ( ties” 1950?b “ a of speak biology, Michurinist nificantlyless mentions. how Regarding SCIENTISTS 6 the depend biology Michurinist and ism 4 .4. their negatives -like; -like; It was also again the programmatic statements of the early early the programmaticstatements of the again also Itwas theother side, On RQ3: RQ3: Q:RQ2: ( Lysenko 1960, 1960, Lysenko teachings, forbeing teachings, 2 , ), ), change
the previous research questionspreviousresearchthe the the W H an understanding in which “ understanding which an in ? ,
OW than HAT role of humans humans of role imported Soviet discourse, and this image quickly merged with Lysenkoism and Lysenkoism with merged quickly image this and discourse, Soviet imported the environment the under the all-knowing, all-knowing, the under I decided, therefore, the decided, I toconclusion give of the thesis inthis subchapter. ? living nature; nature; living
W
merely WAS ERE 22–23). 22–23). afer condemningafer Lysenkoism basis the timeMichurinist this on and biology, though it was was it though
Te programmaticstatements theof early
THE the the THE on myopic, holisticdogma
the man ROLE
Darwin was was Darwin and society society and ENVIRONMENT control t he actual actual he subsequent and organisms and dialectical unity between the living and its environment” environment” its and living the between unity dialectical of the age. age. the of
OF ed more than enough to arrive at a far reaching conclusion, as at as conclusion, reaching far a at arrive to enough than more ; ;
transformer
even more more even professional, HUMANS we possibly take into account all circumstances and all reali circumstancesall and accounttakeintoall possibly we 11th thesis on F on thesis 11th participation also also Anon. n.d. in the natural and social environment, social and natural the in thought of thought provision of T con
he key key he were were AND 67
verged verged AND on the creation of of creation the on s; the environment the of the nature the of there static, only are objectifying gaze gaze objectifying
, 1)., conceptualized conceptualized
ORGANISMS is long gone, gone, long is as as words and expressions and words
e SOCIETY its claims and needs, its and claims uerbach the “founder of materialist biology,” as he biology,”as materialist of “founder the together Man appeared to be a Promethean trans Promethean a be to appeared Man fifies . . : “ : Tese all all Tese
fifies , , IN actively
Philosophers have sought to un to sought have Philosophers and and CONCEPTUALIZED everything is mediated through mediated is everything where I found clues as to what to as clues found I where
by its THE characteristic of Western of characteristicsci , inspired, byLysenkoism and plant plant exact opposites opposites exact organisms organisms factual, text-book-likefactual,
follow filling the discursive gapsdiscursive filling the NATURAL
and and scientists were ed from ed direct I found even less even found I : : alike alike can
AND , ,
be created; be
I found sig found I belief init. belief enemies, or BY are seen seen are , as I men I as ,
SOCIAL ( PLANT Anon.
pre at ------
CEU eTD Collection preserve his safety isperhaps the modernism…” safety his keystone ofpreserve high and interests his suit to nature tame man’s to was destiny it that belief Tis … faith. their to central remained that ambition man’spurposes—an suit to nature transform to ambition limitless nearly transformationwiththe started “[T] nally wrote: (Ibid.,94–95) nature. of Scott As origi science throughenvironment the organisms and modifying and society,humans and changing understanding of natural laws” scientific commensuratewith nature) human (including nature over control increasing an least, not and, order, humangrowingsatisfaction needs, theof social of rationalproduction,design the of sion expan the knowledge, technical and scientific of development the progress, linear continued about (1998). Scott from Hungary to exported and state; Soviet thoritarian terms, what itprecisely was Lysenko’s caused fall Levins and Lewontin and yet “ as described be could indeed biology ist unpredictable” “ that respect the in only being former the genetics; synthesis modern the and biology, Michurinist and senkoism and similarity ultimate the established I modernity, of school man 1992 desires” and humanultimatenatureneeds subordination the to of of idea the by and necessity was that showed I things; modernity,other among of project the lies communistregime, a of products as biology, MichurinistLysenkoism and of heart the at that (1992), Bauman on drawing by lishing, accident,toricalbutconscious,torational, according scientific criteria” was social Michurinist therefore biology, the acceptance them of in Hungary “ modernity streamlined, purified of the last shred of the chaotic, the irrational, the spontaneous, the spontaneous, irrational, the chaotic, the the of shred last the of purified streamlined, modernity the reasons for for reasons the [now] [now] indeed Finally, at the point of convergence, I established that the ideological and political mission of mission political and ideological the that established I convergence, of point the at Finally, au the in embedded Anotherwas characterization it Lysenkoism as of Michurinist and biology, also genetics one the time, the of Westerndiscourse reigning the Since that highlighted I refection, my In advancement the and Union” Soviet , 166)., “ possible to conceive of an artificial, engineered society designed, not by custom and his and custom by not designed, society engineered artificial, an of conceive to possible awe-struck by the breathtaking vistas of society doing away with historical and natural and historical with away doing society of vistas breathtaking the by awe-struck (Ibid., 167). I their ascendency their t was called High Modernism, High called was t it was given birth by communism communism by birth given was it Fruo 01 0 10) 2011, (Ferguson Tis argumentstands, (Scott 1998, 89-90).(Scott are probably found among the factors listed by Young by listed factors the among found probably are having this this having chaotic,”“irrational,” “spontaneous,” ( Anon. later 68 in the Literature Review. Nonetheless, in general in Nonetheless, Review. Literature the in 1966, 6). in spitethethat of fact in and “[a] and man . to, to, in certain respects, similar conditions; came conditions; similar respects, certain in was a result of deliberate deliberate of result a was t its center was a supremecenter its a was self-confidencet ( which it later molded as well as molded later it which kinship between the discourses of Ly of discourses the between kinship became the became (Scott 1998, 92). 92). 1998, (Scott Lysenkoism Michurin and embraced, was also a also was embraced, trial of and “ and creation hey began with a with began hey unpredictable”; attachment Afer estab )
, , diferent that was that as “[i] as (1978) ( Bau to it t ------
CEU eTD Collection questions but which questions to‘ be are allowed Descartes, of time the from perhaps inating ist biology thebeholder(cf. Lewontinand Levins). of contingency glected or time up speed temporal diferent between switch to able being words, other awareness an cupy sumptions and actors their Instead, organisms. ronment and structuretripartiteof the of tuted Towardrefections,myand endanalyses of the 6.6. Tis was precisely connected to my Teoretical Framework, Teoretical my to connected precisely was Tis S UMMARY on the long run; longthe on , my, intentioninpurge towas this attempt as
on the stage of modernity, modernity, of stage the on inferences of
AND slow slow
of of O the simultaneously simultaneously the it down down it UTLOOK
by i world zeitgeists. dentifying the opposing processes of a system, a of processes opposing the dentifying in order not to miss important important miss to not order in it it ideology and and ideology was possible to see to possible open and closed state of a black box box black a of state closed and open or unknowingly unknowingly which a diferent a politics, and science; humans and society; and envi and society; humansand science; and politics, interesting’ 69 “ [ the dualistic, reductionist dictate these three three these
When applied to Lysenkoism to applied When view emerge view on strings in a system system a in strings on ” ( s] Lewontin 2007, 229). not only the form of our answers to answers our of form the only not events which would otherwise be ne be otherwise would which events and methodological methodological and through through constellations of relationshipsconstellationsand of d , , which which which I I which and and the was (cf. Latour 1987); Latour (cf. way of thinking orig founded on the as the on founded endeavored endeavored relative,historical no no perspectives, to perspectives, and Michurinand longer constilonger to to oc
in ------
CEU eTD Collection Under the Influence: Dialectical Essays on Ecology, Agriculture, and Health, and Monthly Press. Review Agriculture, Ecology, on Essays Dialectical Influence: the Under 2007. R. Lewontin, and J.,Fracchia, 185. E 2003. M. Flitner, the Union. Soviet Jr. Ferguson, A. M. 2011. Tuin, I. 2012. Tuin, I. der van and R., Dolphijn, theand Cold War. W., DeJong-Lambert, New York: Springer. 2012. ______. documents/WdJLPaper.pdf Ohi 25–7 October, at War, Cold the of Memory International the and YoungCulture,Practices, Conference: Researchers W.20 DeJong-Lambert, Foundation. July Accessed 20. URL: D., Cohen, U.Beck, 1992. Bauman, Z. http://epa.oszk.hu/00700/00775/00007/1999_07_17.html Balla, Cell Amasino, A 7.1. 7 ugenic ugenic . References. 16 2553–2559. (October): o, U.S. o, CADEMIC L. 1999. Refexió [Refection]. [Refection]. Refexió 1999. L. New Materialism: Interviews & Cartographies, T R. 2004. 2004. R. hought in Germany, the Soviet Union, and the United States. the Union, Germany,and in Soviet the hought
Accessed July 16. July Accessed and 1992. Risk Society: TowardsRisk Society: aNew Modernity Crabtree, B. B. Crabtree, L Havighurst Center for Russianand Post-Soviet Studies,Miami University, T Genetic Genetic Intimations of Postmodernity Te Cold War Cold Te Journal of the History of Biolog ITERATURE he Hilltop Review V ernalization, Competence, and the Epigenetic Memory of Winter. Winter. of Memory Epigenetic the and Vernalization,Competence, and and 07 Te G . . Krementsov, N. 2012. O 2012. Krementsov,N. Te Cold War Cold Te eographies: A A eographies: 2006. 2006. URL: URL: M yth of of yth P olitics of of olitics Q http://www.qualres.org/HomeInte-3516.html Does Culture Evolve?. CultureEvolve?. Does http://www.units.miamioh.edu/havighurstcenter/conferences/ 4 (2): 8–22. ualitative Research Guidelines Project Guidelines Research ualitative Magyar Tudomány Magyar P rogress in in rogress Interview with Karen Barad. In In Barad. Karen with Interview P H G olitics of of olitics enetic enetic istorical istorical . London: Routledge. London: . y 45y (2012): 373–388. 70 S cience: Dialectics, Dialectics, cience: R n An esearch: , transl., Ritter. M. SAGE. London:
44–70. C G L abels and and abels omparison of of omparison enetic enetic 160 (7): (7): 160 In In
Ann Humanities Open Arbor: Press. Lewontin, R., R., Lewontin, R esearch I ntroduction to the Lysenko Afair Lysenko the to ntroduction I ssues: Te Lysenko Lysenko Te ssues: 892–?. Accessed July 20. URL: 20. July Accessed 892–?. D A . . istortion andLysenkoismistortion in grarian grarian Geoforum Paper presented at at presented Paper Dolphijn, R., and van der van and R., Dolphijn, . . Robert Wood Johnson Robert
and Levins, R. Levins, and 267 M –
odernization and odernization 34 (2 34 296 . New York: New . C 0 ontroversy Te Plant Te 03): 03):
Oxford, Biology Annual 175– .
CEU eTD Collection York: Monthly Press. Review R. ______. York: Monthly Press. Review R. ______. Press. Health, and Agriculture, Ecology, on Dialectical Essays Influence: ______Monthly Press. Review Under Agriculture, theDialectical Influence: and Essays Ecology, onBiology Health, R., Lewontin, Health, and Agriculture, Ecology, on Monthly Press. Review Essays Dialectical Influence: the der ______. House of Anansi Press. 1995. R. Lewontin, bridge: 1987. B. Latour, Krementsov, 1997. N. 85–104. Joravsky, D. 1959. http://www.valosagonline.hu/index.php?oldal=cikk&cazon=371&lap=0May 23. URL: S. Igali, (2): 348-352. Experience?” Russian the from Technology and Science about Learned Hughes, T. P.2000. July 20. URL: Gutting, Publishers. Notebooks Prison the A Gramsci,
Biology Under the Influence: Dialectical Essays on Ecology, Agriculture, and Health, Ecology, UnderDialectical Essays on theInfluence: Biology Agriculture, and Health, Ecology, UnderDialectical Essays on theInfluence: Biology Harvard University Press. 2002. 2002. G. 2013. 2013. G. . . . . 2007. 2007. 2007 2007 2007 1971. 1971. A liszenkoizmus Magyarországon [Lysenkoism in Hungary]. Hungary]. [Lysenkoism in Magyarországon liszenkoizmus A http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/foucault/ and Levins, R. R. Levins, and b c d S . . Genes, Environment, Genes, Organisms and . . . . Soviet Soviet Foucault.Michel Te Te inei cin Action: in cience Aspects of Whole and Parts in PopulationBiology in Parts and Whole of Aspects Te Biological and the Social. In Social. the and Biological Te Educating the Intuition to Cope with Complexity with Cope Intuition to the Educating Lessons Lessons Biology as Ideology: Te Doctrine of DNA of Doctrine Te Ideology: as Biology , eds., transl. transl. eds., , Stalinist S tudy of of tudy Marxism F rom 2007 S P cience hilosophy: hilosophy: and and Q. Hoare, and G. N. Smith, Smith, N. G. and Hoare, Q. S a oviet Te Stanford Te EncyclopediaPhilosophyof o oto How . . Organism and Environment and Organism . Princeton:. Princeton University Press. B iology iology S cience and cienceand F Problems of lo ollow B 71 efore S Lewontin, R., R., Lewontin, init n and cientists T L . . echnology: Loren Graham’s Have echnology: “What We ysenko. In P Lewontin, R., R., Lewontin, hilosophy hilosophy . 2nd ed. ed. 2nd . 35–38. NewYork: 35–38. Monthly Review Journaltheof History Ideas of 3 4 . In In . E and Levins, R. Levins, and 3–3 gnesngineers and and . In In . . In In . Lewontin, R., R., Lewontin, 7 Concord, Concord, 7 Technology and Culture and Technology and Levins, R. Levins, and H . New York: InternationalYork: New . Lewontin, R., R., Lewontin, Lewontin, R., R., Lewontin, , , istory Valóság 2013 Summer.2013 Accessed
T 221 ruhhrough 3
. In . – Biology Underthe Biology Ontario, Ontario,
1 234 45 (3). Accessed (3). 45 –3
183 125 and Levins, R. Levins, and Selections Selections S e York: New . 4 ociety
Biology Un Biology . New. York: and Levins, and Levins, and – – 198 14 Canada 20 (1):20 8. New 8. . . New . Cam f rom 41 - - :
CEU eTD Collection logical research]. logical ______entific research]. ______on the Institute creation of Agrobiological Intézet biológiai létesítéséről [Te ______Institute Agrobiological of creation Genetikai Intézet the Iratai 3/ on Hungary of Republic [Te létesítéséről Intézet Agrobiológiai ______. TudományokBiológiai Osztálya 5/10. events]. biological eseménynaptárof [Calendar Biológiai n.d. Anon. A 7.2. com/rmyoung/papers/getting.html 1978. M. Young,R. Press. 1985. R. Williams, Continuum.137–151. London: Aesthetic2009. Te In Gaze. Scruton, R. Failed Scott, tics of 2008. Roll-Hansen, N. Washington, Nabham, ( senko’s Tudományos[ 1960-ban Akadémián, Magyar a előadása emlékezetes Liszenko 2011. Müller,M. 11 ): ): 1355– . New. Haven Yale London: and University Press. RCHIVAL S J. C. 1998. 1998. C. J.
M cience. emorable emorable G. P. G. . 1950?b. A magyar biológiai kutatások ötéves terve [Te five-year plan of bio of plan Hungarian five-year [Te kutatásokterve ötéves biológiai magyar A 1950?b. . of five-yearsci plan Hungarian [Te tudományos kutatás terve ötéves magyar A 1950?a. . Agro rendelete F.M. Számú (119) 8.062/8/1949. Miniszter Földművelésügyi A 1949b. . 1949 1359. D.C. Osiris 2009. 2009. S Archives of the Academy, Tudományok Biológiai VIII. Osztálya 8/3 a Archives of the Academy, Tudományok Biológiai VIII. Osztálya . A Magyar Köztársaság Kormányának 4.008/1949. (91.) Korm. Számú rendelete Számú Korm. (91.) 4.008/1949. Kormányának Köztársaság Magyar A . OURCES : Island: Press. Seeing Like a State: How Certain Schemes to Improve the Human Condition Condition Human the Improve to Schemes Certain How State: a Like Seeing L Getting Started on Lysenkoism on Started Getting 23 (1): 166–188. Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society and culture of vocabulary A Keywords: ecture at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences in 1960]. Hungariantheat ecture1960]. in AcademySciences of Where Our Food Our WhereComes Retracing From: Nikolay Vavilov’s Wishful Wishful 2? . S cience: Te Te cience: 8.062/8/1949. of the (119.) MoA. Minister Decree of Agriculture 4.008/1949. (91.) Gov. Decree of the Government of the of Government the of Decree Gov. (91.) 4.008/1949. Te Roger Scruton Reader Scruton Roger Te ]. ]. Archives of the Academy, P ersistence of T. ersistenceof Lysenko’s D. 72 . . Accessed July 16. URL: http://human-nature. URL: 16. July Accessed , comp., ed., introd. comp.,, ed., MarkDooley, . Archives of the Academy, the VIII. of Archives New York: Oxford University Oxford York: New Genetikai Intézet Iratai 3/ .]. rhvs o h Academy, the of Archives A Magyar Tudomány Magyar grobiology in the the in grobiology Q uest to End FamineEnd to uest 5/9 . . P h
2? 172 ave oli Ly . ------.
CEU eTD Collection changes”]. Archives of the Academy, “ research 1964 the of ponent “A Erdélyi, micro-evolution)]. (without research Genetikai Intézet Iratai 3/5. genetics plant Hungarian of L. Daniel, Intézet Iratai 3/8. the by ______chives of the Academy, Genetikai Intézet Iratai 3/8. genetics of progress the of achievements significant most Te [Appendix, ______2 [ ______by rected ______bate]. Archives of the Academy, Tudományok Biológiai VIII. Osztálya 72/3. ülésről megtartott 9-én október 1958. részvételével ______Intézet Iratai 3/ Group]. Biological the of meeting 1956 June the 1, of [Records ______Tudományok Biológiai VIII. Osztálya 8/9. Committee]. Biology the of meeting 1954 14, December the of [Records ______dományok Osztálya 8/9. Tu Biológiai Academy,VIII. the of Archives Committee]. Biology the of meeting 1953 9, vember ______elaboration) irányelvei) ______Topicresearchthefor 1961 plan sheet ]. ]. biológiai mennyiségi és minőségi változások filozófiai elemzése” c. témájáról [ témájáról c. elemzése” filozófiai változások minőségi és mennyiségi biológiai Archives of the Academy, Section of Biological Sciences on the state of genetics of state the on Sciences Biological of Section L Barna Győrfy . 196 . . 1956. Jegyzőkönyv, készült a biológiai biológiai a készült Jegyzőkönyv, 1956. . üléséről megtartott 14-én december 1954. Bizottság Biológiai a Jegyzőkönyv 1954. . Bizottság 1953. november Biológiai a 9-i 1953.üléséről. Jegyzőkönyv általános kidolgozásának terv (A terve ötéves kutatások biológiai magyar A 1950?c. . . 1966. A Biológiai Tudományok Osztályának jelentése a genetika helyzetéről Tudományokhelyzetéről genetika Biológiai a jelentéseA Osztályának 1966. . évben 15 utolsó az mozzanatai legjelentősebb haladásának genetika A Melléklet, 1965?. . 2. bírálata és elemzése koncepció genetikai molekuláris A – 1961-re Témalap 1960. . 1960? . Jegyzőkönyv, 1958. . 1966. A magyar növénygenetikai kutatások helyzetképe (mikroevolúció nélkül) [Te statenövénygenetikai kutatások [Te (mikroevolúciómagyar helyzetképenélkül) A 1966. [Te five-year plan of Hungarian biological research (Te general general (Te research biological of Hungarian plan five-year [Te ]. Archives]. of the Academy, Győrfy Barna Iratai 7/2. 5 5. . Opponensi vélemény a MTA Genetikai Intézet 1964. évi kutatási beszámolójának kutatási évi 1964. Intézet MTA Genetikai a vélemény Opponensi . a . Győrfy Barna által irányított kutatási tervfeladatok [Planned research topics di topics research [Planned irányítottkutatásitervfeladatok által Barna Győrfy . ]. Archives]. of the Academy, Győrfy Barna Iratai 7/5. Genetikai Intézet Iratai 79/1. Te philosophical analysis of biological quantitative and qualitative and quantitative biological of analysis philosophical Te eeia iotánk a Boóii Coot vezetőségének Csoport Biológiai a Bizottságnak Genetikai A Genetikai Intézet Iratai 79/4 “Te analysis and criticismanalysis concept” and genetic the of molecular “Te 73 C [Records of the October 9, 1958 Genetic De Genetic 1958 9, October the of [Records soport 1956. június 1-én délelőtt tartott ülésén tartott délelőtt 1-én június 1956. soport ]. Archives of the Academy,Genetikai the of Archives ]. Archives of the Academy,the of Archives . rhvs o h Academy, the of Archives Archives of the Academy, the of Archives in the last 15 years 15 last the in principles of the the of principles [Records of the No[Records Opinion of the op the of Opinion [Te report [Te Genetikai ]. Ar ]. plan’s ------
CEU eTD Collection of the Academy, Sárkány,Intézet Az [ története 1948. 1939-1948 S. Genetikai Intézet Iratai 3/8. the by genetics of state the on 14/1966. no. tion [ helyzetéről genetika a határozata számú 14/1966. MTAElnöksége Az 1966. I. Rusznyák, plant breeding]. 1949. B. Rieger, Academy, Iratok Elnökségi 226/4. biology Lysenko, Archives of the Academy, Győrfy Barna Iratai 7/2. tésé ______on the Sciences stateof Biological of genetics helyzetéről ______debates]. genetic ______Sciences]. ______of Genetikai Intézet Iratai Academy 3/2. Hungarian the of Institute Genetic the of tion ______search]. re domesticgenetic achievementsof kutatások eredményei[Te genetikai hazai A Győrfy, 1956. B. 7/1. breeding plant our of development and ganization [ fejlesztésére Javaslat és növénynemesítésünk 1949. Győrfy,átszervezésére B.? ről [Barna Győ ] Archives of the Academy, Genetikai Intézet Iratai 3/8. . T. D. 1960. A micsurini biológia időszerű kérdései kérdései időszerű biológia micsurini A 1960. D. T. Lecture presented at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, 13 January. Archives of the of Archives January. 13 Sciences, of Academy Hungarian the at presented Lecture Archives of the Academy, Genetikai Intézet Iratai 3/ . 1965 . opera [Te működése IntézeténekTudományos Genetikai Akadémia Magyar A 1959?. . . 1966. GyőrfyBarnaStraub 1966. levele Brunónak . a genetika a Osztályának Tudományok Biológiai a hozzászólása Barna Győrfy 1965c. . helyzet kialakult alapján viták genetikai A 1965b. . szóló jelentés-tervezetéhez szóló Genetikai Intézet Iratai 3/1. Archives of the Academy, a Archives of the Academy, A mezőgazdasági növénynemesítés ötéves terve [Te five-year plan of agricultural of plan five-year [Te terve ötéves növénynemesítés mezőgazdasági A . . rfy’s Az MTAAz GeneticInstitute IntézeteGenetikai [Te theHungarian of Academy of letterto Brunó Straub F. on the [Barna [Barna Győrfy Ba Győrfy Ba ]. Archives]. of the Academy, Győrfy Barna Iratai 7/2 Győ directorate of the the of directorate 74 rfy’s Te history of the Institutethe of history Te 1939-1948 ]. ]. Archives of the Academy, the of Archives r r na Iratai na Iratai comment on the draf report of the Section the of report draf the on comment reportby the Biológiai Tudományok Biológiai Osztályánakjelen [ 3
Te present questions of Michurinist of questions present Te
Sciences] 7/1. 7/1. the regarding situation current [Te . HAS Section of Biological Sciences of Biological Section . Archives of the Academy, the of Archives . ]. ]. Archives of the Academy, the of Archives Proposal for the reor the for Proposal Győrfy Ba Győrfy ]. ]. r Archives na Iratai na Resolu . ]. - - - - -