The Presence and Perception of Lysenkoism and Michurinist Biology
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
A thesis submitted to the Department of Environmental Sciences and Policy of Central European University in part fulfilment of the Degree of Master of Science The presence and perception of Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology at the Genetic Institute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, !"#$ !%% CEU eTD Collection Tamás SZABÓ July, '( " )udapest *otes on copyright and the o+nership of intellectual property rights, (1) Copyright in text of this thesis rests with the Author. Copies (by any process) either in full, or of extracts, may be made only in accordance with instructions given by the Author and lodged in the Central European niversity !ibrary. "etails may be obtained from the !ibrarian. #is page must form part of any such copies made. $urther copies (by any process) of copies made in accor% dance with such instructions may not be made without the permission (in writing) of the Author. (2) Te ownership of any intellectual property rights which may be described in this thesis is vested in the Central European niversity, sub'ect to any prior agreement to the contrary, and may not be made available for use by third parties without the written permission of the niversity, which will prescribe the terms and conditions of any such agreement. (3) $or bibliographic and reference purposes this thesis should be referred to as) *zabó, -. 2.1/. Te presence and perception of Lysenkoism and Michurinist biology at the Genetic Insti- tute of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, !"#$ !%%& 0aster of *cience thesis, Central European niversity, Budapest. $urther information on the conditions under which disclosures and exploitation may ta2e place is available from the 3ead of the "epartment of Environmental *ciences and Policy, Central European niversity. CEU eTD Collection ii Author-s declaration 5o portion of the wor2 referred to in this thesis has been submitted in support of an application for another degree or quali7cation of this or any other university or other institute of learning. -am8s Szab, CEU eTD Collection iii CEN-9A! E 9:4EAN U5;<ER*;-= ABSTRACT OF THESIS submitted by) -am8s S>A1? for the degree of Master of Science and entitled) Te presence and perception of !ysen2oism and 0ichurinist biology at the @enetic ;nstitute of the 3ungarian Academy of Sciences, 1A/BC1ADD 0onth and Year of submission) July, 2.1/. AFer agronomist -. ". !ysen2o gained supreme power in *oviet agricultural matters in 1A/B, his controversial 0ichurinist biology was ardently exported to satellite states, including 3ungary. ;n the midst of this centralized purging of modern genetics and evolutionary biology, the @enetic ;nstitute of the 3ungarian Academy of *ciences inexplicably seemed to resist the ideological, Gpseudoscien% ti7c” push until !ysen2oIs fall in 1AD/%DJ. ;n my thesis, to understand the history of plant genetic research at the Genetic Institute between 1A/B and 1ADD, ; show the extent, and the involved scientistsI perception of !ysen2oism and 0ichurinist biology. 1y analy+ing archival sources through interrelated conceptions of relationships (environment and organismsK humans and societyK politics and science) of the rival scienti7c dis% courses, a representative image is drawn about the perceived order of things. -his is interpreted using the wor2s of Latour, and Lewontin and Levins, emphasi+ing a science that is in the collective ma2ingK merging context and contentsK historical contingencyK interpenetration and mutual constitutiveness. ;t is found that though operating with diLerent sets of closed concepts, both discourses share ap% proximately the same stance in their relationships toward the natural and social environmentK the role of humansK and the interaction of politics and science. Te same underlying attitude of moder% nity is uncovered, stressing the idea of a consciously designed of society with 4romethean men, and the subordination of nature to their willK devoid of political and historical self%refection, promoting the ofen still prevailing, yet false idea of neutral science in the sole service of society. CEU eTD Collection Keywords: biology, genetics, agriculture, politics, science, pseudoscience, Lysen2o, socialism, moder% nity, discourse analysis i. Ackno+ledgements ; would li2e to than2 my supervisor, @untra AistaraK >s,Na *zatm8ri%0argitaiK Od8m $PlöpK "i8na 3ayK and Béla Nov82 for their help and support. CEU eTD Collection . Table of Contents 1. Introduction....................................................................................................................................................... 1 &. Methodology..................................................................................................................................................... J (. Teoretical Framewor2.................................................................................................................................. 1. (.1. Latour) Black boxes, science in the ma2ing, merging context and contents............................... 1. (.&. Lewontin and Levins) Dialectics, contingencyK interpenetration, mutual constitutiveness....1( /. Literature Review............................................................................................................................................ 1D /.1. Te popular opinion.............................................................................................................................. 1D /.1.1. Neo%!amarckian pseudoscience................................................................................................. 1D /.1.&. A political dogma.......................................................................................................................... 1S /.&. Enter history........................................................................................................................................... 1B /.(. Complex explanationsT....................................................................................................................... &. /.(.1. … And their details....................................................................................................................... &1 /./. Criti6ue.................................................................................................................................................... && /./.1. Te lack of environment and organisms................................................................................... &( /./.&. Te lack of humans and society.................................................................................................. &/ /.J. Conclusion.............................................................................................................................................. &D J. Findings............................................................................................................................................................ &B J.1. RU1) How did ideology and politics infuence plant genetic researchV......................................&B J.1.1. IntroductionK and a short summary of history........................................................................ &B J.1.&. Te establishment in the early fiFiesK and the Institute......................................................... &A J.1.(. Te dissenting voices and turning point of 1AJ(%J/.............................................................. (1 J.1./. 1AJD) “We are liberated from the oppression of dogmatismH...............................................(& J.1./.1. Criti6ue.................................................................................................................................. (( J.1.J. Te 1AJB Genetic Debate) Restoration.................................................................................... (J J.1.D. Te comparative dialectical materialism of the early sixties.................................................. (B J.1.S. 1ADJ%DD) “Te switch from ‘!ysen2oist geneticsI will be considerably diYcultH............../. J.1.S.1. Criti6ue.................................................................................................................................. /1 CEU eTD Collection J.1.S.&. “Tis fight of worldviews did not restrict any biologistH.............................................. /& J.1.B. AFer 1ADDK and a one%time reminder........................................................................................ // J.1.A. Conclusion and criti6ue) Discourses and Scientization........................................................ /J J.&. RU&) How were the environment and organisms conceptualized by plant scientistsV............/A J.&.1. Introduction................................................................................................................................... /A vi J.&.&. Te inauguration of the early fiFies........................................................................................... /A J.&.(. Te restoration of the early sixties.............................................................................................. J1 J.&./. Te geneticistsI side....................................................................................................................... J( J.&.J. Conclusion and outlook.............................................................................................................. J/ J.(. RU() What was the role of humans and society in the natural and social environmentV........JD J.(.1. Introduction..................................................................................................................................