There seems to be a lot confusion in the replies here regarding what Audra is saying — which is an entirely uncontroversial statement within the academic disciplines that study how science works now and in the past (e.g., the History, Anthropology, & Sociology of Science).https://twitter.com/ColdWarScience/status/1017211382176059392 …
-
-
That is not the political context of the serach for GR. That is the political context of one man's reaction to GR
-
Re-read the article again Cormac... "It was Stark who, as the editor of Jahrbuch der Radioaktivität und Elektronik, asked in 1907, then still rather unknown, Albert Einstein to write a review article on the principle of relativity. ..."
-
And anyway you're misunderstanding the definition of political. But here's an easy hint: if people have strong political responses to science, then it's hard to argue that there isn't something political going on. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deutsche_Physik …
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
You could certainly argue that the reaction of some to GR was politically informed. But that is not the same thing as arguing that the search for GR was political
-
It was shaped by its political context, is what I am saying. If that seems odd to you, again, confront the definition of "political" I've gone on at length to explicate in the thread. It is not the colloquial sense of "politically motivated."
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.