News from
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Office of Communications
Stanhope Hall
Princeton, New Jersey 08544-5264
Telephone 609-258-3601; Fax 609-258-1301Contact: Caroline Moseley 609/258-5725
Date: April 2, 1998
Princeton Faculty Group Gives ‘Reality Check’ to Science Wars
PRINCETON, N.J.&endash; A group of Princeton faculty members has formed an interdisciplinary discussion group to bridge the gap between the arts and the sciences and strengthen scholarship in both realms.
Dubbed Reality Check, the group addresses the divide -- commonly referred to by participants and observers as "the science wars" -- that is being fought inside and outside academe. At Princeton, the science wars are being negotiated rather than fought, according to faculty who take part in the discussions.
"There is a real gulf between those who regard the best modern science as a paradigm of rational inquiry, and those who approach the enterprise of science with suspicion about its motives, its procedures and, ultimately, the legitimacy of its results," declares Gideon Rosen, assistant professor of philosophy.
"I’ve never known arts and sciences to be so divided as they are today," agrees Alison Jolly, visiting lecturer in ecology and evolutionary biology.
Lee Silver, professor of molecular biology an author of Remaking Eden: Cloning and Beyond in a Brave New World, explains, "The purpose of Reality Check is to maintain a dialog between scientists and those nonscientists in the humanities and social sciences who study the role that science and scientists play in history and culture."
"The idea," adds Reality Check coordinator Angela Creager, assistant professor of history, "is to become familiar with each other’s work and to test each other’s assumptions." She emphasizes, however, that "Disagreements are not always between scientists and humanists.
"When we discussed Lee Silver’s work on behavioral genetics, for example, the experimental psychologists among us disagreed with Lee’s interpretations as a molecular biologist, because their biological understandings of how intelligence related to physiology and genetics were different from his."
Still, Creager, a historian of science, believes, "Scientists have good reason to worry about the future of their enterprises. Political and economic changes have already begun to curtail the funding and autonomy of scientific research." And in the biosciences, "Alliances between university labs and biotech companies have become routine," leading critics "to question the credibility of discoveries."
What’s more, says Jolly, "As reproductive technology becomes more complex, a lot of people are scared by it. They begin to feel toward scientists as people used to feel toward witches."
Enter Reality Check, which originated in talks between Charles Gross, professor of psychology, and primatologist Jolly. Associate Professor of Anthropology Rena Lederman came up with the name.
The group&endash;whose membership currently includes anthropologists, psychologists, biologists, historians of science, a literary scholar, a philosopher and a molecular biologist&endash;meets several times a semester over lunch to discuss topics of common interest.
A recent luncheon topic was Jolly’s paper, "Women in the Wild," about women who study primates. In the course of the paper she addresses Donna Haraway’s Primate Visions: Gender, Race and Nature in the World of Modern Science (1989), a book about primatologists that Jolly describes as "a litmus test for postmodernism. If you’re a postmodernist, you tend to love it; if you’re a primatologist, you tend to hate it."
Haraway, says Jolly, "has spent a lot of care and scholarship and even love trying to understand primatologists. Her book made us realize the fundamental importance of a lot of things we tried to ignore: the colonial ethos; support from middle-class parents, friends, lovers; financial incentives; the need to view monkeys and apes as the ultimately powerless Others.
"But," says Jolly, a veteran of the science wars, "we can’t forgive her for ignoring the one reason we thought we were studying primatology: to learn more about primates."
As inspiriting as it is, in Rosen’s words, "to participate in serious conversation about important issues with colleagues who have given the issues a lot of thought," Reality Check is not just talk.
Silver says, "Reality Check has had a major impact on my professional life. I could never have written Remaking Eden without understanding how science is perceived by people who are not scientists, and without understanding the historical framework in which technology has progressed."
Observes Silver, "I don’t think Reality Check could happen at other universities that are much larger and where it is more difficult for professors from different disciplines to get together. Princeton is unique in the way it fosters intellectual engagement across disciplines."