Author: Jan Sapp
Genre: Science, History
Jan Sapp’s book basically describes the tragic career of Franz Moewus, initially regarded as the founding father of molecular biology and later dismissed as a fraud. The book explores the factors the led to these sad turn of events. Using Moewus’ case as an example, the book uncovers the sociopolitical parts of science and shows that in the end scientists too are human. It also describes the concept of fraud and shows that many a times it is difficult to define it and more importantly to prove that it has actually happened.
Genre: Science, History
Jan Sapp’s book basically describes the tragic career of Franz Moewus, initially regarded as the founding father of molecular biology and later dismissed as a fraud. The book explores the factors the led to these sad turn of events. Using Moewus’ case as an example, the book uncovers the sociopolitical parts of science and shows that in the end scientists too are human. It also describes the concept of fraud and shows that many a times it is difficult to define it and more importantly to prove that it has actually happened.
Along with
the Moewus’ case, the book also briefly discusses the story of two founding
fathers: Garrod and Mendel. The author highlights the situations that led to
these two being regarded as founding fathers. The author reasons that it was
not the experiments done by these two but rather the interpretations others
made of their studies that were important factors. In fact, Mendel’s results
were actually ‘too good’ and rather over simplified and it is suspected that he
polished his data. However, that does not seem to have affected him being
regarded as the father of genetics.
Personally,
I found the book very enlightening. It uncovers a side of science that is
seldom seen. When the history of science is described in textbooks, it only
deals with the triumphs. The books tell us that the various scientists came to
their conclusions based on objective reasoning and sound and accurate
experiments. However, more often this is not the case. Scientists are but
human, and it is difficult to be objective all the time. Sometimes their
judgments are influenced by the sociopolitical situations of that time,
opinions of peers and also their own personal biases.
Comments
Post a Comment