Switch to: References

Add citations

You must login to add citations.
  1. Lysenko in Yugoslavia, 1945–1950s: How to De-Stalinize Stalinist Science.Vedran Duančić - 2020 - Journal of the History of Biology 53 (1):159-194.
    By the summer of 1948, socialist Yugoslavia seemed determined to follow in the footsteps of its closest ally, the Soviet Union, and strike a decisive blow to “reactionary genetics.” But barely a month before the infamous VASKhNIL session, the Soviet–Yugoslav split began to unravel, influencing the reception of Lysenko’s doctrine in Yugoslavia. Instead of simply dismissing it as yet another example of Stalinist deviationism, Yugoslav mičurinci carefully weighed its political and ideological implications, trying to negotiate the Stalinist origins of Michurinist (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Lysenko Unemployed: Soviet Genetics after the Aftermath.Michael D. Gordin - 2018 - Isis 109 (1):56-78.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • (1 other version)Citizen Seismology, Stalinist Science, and Vladimir Mannar’s Cold Wars.Elena Aronova - 2017 - Science, Technology, and Human Values 42 (2):226-256.
    This essay takes a historical view on “citizen science” by exploring its socialist version via the case of a Soviet amateur seismologist Vladimir Mannar. In the wake of the 1948 Ashgabat earthquake, which coincided with Lysenko’s victory in his campaign against genetics, Mannar launched an aborted campaign for a participatory “socialist seismology.” Mannar co-opted Lysenkoist language of science for the people and gained professional status within professional seismology but was shut out by the experts capitalizing on a “big science” imperative (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Defending Scientific Freedom and Democracy: The Genetics Society of America’s Response to Lysenko.Rena Selya - 2012 - Journal of the History of Biology 45 (3):415-442.
    In the late 1940s and early 1950s, the leaders of the Genetics Society of America struggled to find an appropriate group response to Trofim Lysenko’s scientific claims and the Soviet treatment of geneticists. Although some of the leaders of the GSA favored a swift, critical response, procedural and ideological obstacles prevented them from following this path. Concerned about establishing scientific orthodoxy on one hand and politicizing the content of their science on the other, these American geneticists drew on democratic language (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   2 citations  
  • Dialectical Materialism Serves Voluntarist Productivism: The Epistemic Foundation of Lysenkoism in Socialist China and North Vietnam.Jongsik Christian Yi - 2021 - Journal of the History of Biology 54 (3):513-539.
    This essay asks why Chinese and North Vietnamese agricultural scientists in the 1950s and 1960s willingly adopted the Soviet agricultural sciences represented not only by agronomists Ivan Michurin and Trofim Lysenko but soil scientist Vasili Williams. The answer, I argue, is that they were fascinated by the promise of Soviet agrobiology that I conceptualize as a combination of dialectical materialism and voluntarist productivism: if one masters the interconnectivity between plants, microbes, organic and inorganic materials, and soil, one can overcome the (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark  
  • Nikolai Vavilov in the years of Stalin's ‘Revolution from Above’.Eduard I. Kolchinsky - 2014 - Centaurus 56 (4):330-358.
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark   1 citation  
  • What’s in a name? From “fluctuation fit” to “conformational selection”: rediscovery of a concept.Beáta G. Vértessy & Ferenc Orosz - 2021 - History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences 43 (3):1-21.
    Rediscoveries are not rare in biology. A recent example is the re-birth of the "fluctuation fit" concept developed by F. B. Straub and G. Szabolcsi in the sixties of the last century, under various names, the most popular of which is the "conformational selection". This theory offers an alternative to the "induced fit" concept by Koshland for the interpretation of the mechanism of protein—ligand interactions. A central question is whether the ligand induces a conformational change (as described by the induced (...)
    Download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    Bookmark