ÿWPC½( `õ]åF¹¹U‹€Wpþ„SGua4ªÚг±ì˜Œõ·Xxòµ-”yªR8õ!8D€¶Œ$`pÿ=ÊOšÌâHãb*\ îÙïæÓFxÓÏ.TDâÜ‘Þ>KãÏUG%eû—>ÇÚÛõª7&T.Û¶‰VçÙÇ…“Ãr5ûº44{PT×ý¹%TP%a )‰÷†ØÔíÒ@‰W‘Ëhº¢MuáËåž=ì>Ý«ÍNGöݬ1š›;ÖåDCeˆ•.Ûè ç«uÅå™5‰µìÄ=×1µZm?í¯‰Úg$izáYj¿c †¨©Ûð^ýU¹<ÈÂXßãÝgÁšW·ºÆÉ;‰ cÚå†c*.fœà›ÐQ¦1U.ÂSÏPИ¶Ïx‚8qbèí¾t$n΄âVF´Î¿pº:ý†¶‡ ºˆeô HÔ#„"ÍfÇã?âÕžLëÿEBl!B=¢k’®r_>hTlÒúøî3{ÂåüE¯ƒ$‘ÚWK ÿëzÞÅûw$ž-fá)½%Ì~¬w\ÌP ¡0¸Bìíÿñ÷´›Û±ú‚JDCËØ¡_R[ü“`„òžç˶‡Z>Y 3°È6•Ú®&äó4ú·Ç]k|"†T Ü3lí:U :,nf %i 0äo 0ÎS 0Ç! 0Æè 0¯® 0¯] 0® 0®º 0Úh 0¥B 0±ç 0ƒ˜ 0v 0v‘ 0‰ 0‰ 0Ü 0ïõ 0ä 0æ 0)û 0<$ 0N` 0a® 0$ 0ª3|Ý 0YEæ 0®è 1– 7(›! 0¹Ã! |" 0=" 0FÊ" 0P# 1“`# 7ó# 0z$ 1·{$ 72%@% BP% 0rm%#Áß%( 'NÈ'^ Ê'w|Ö'4R(f( mh(U>(<þ6X9`("Courier NewTT«<þ6X9`("Courier NewTTXXxþ6X@ÉDQX@<þ6X9`("Courier NewTT&&nþ6X@ÉDQ&@<þ6X9`("Courier NewTT¼¼Œþ6X@ÉDQ¼@XlE0 D:Technical[1]Technical Document StyleÌòòò òÔ  ÔÛ  ÛÔ2ÔI.Ô3  Ô€Ô  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÌÌóóà..àó ól:%ÊÀ:Technical[2]Technical Document StyleÌò òÛ  ÛÔ2ÔA.Ô3  Ô€òòÔ  ÔÔ  ÔóóÌÌà..àó ól7!›:Technical[3]Technical Document StyleÌò òÛ  ÛÔ2Ô1.Ô3  Ô€Ô  ÔÔ  ÔÌà..àó ól6! ):Technical[4]Technical Document Styleò òÛ  ÛÔ2Ôa.Ô3  Ô€Ô  ÔÔ  ÔÌà..àó ól= g:Technical[5]Technical Document Styleà..àò òÛ  ÛÔ2Ô(1)Ô3  Ô€.€€ó ól= …:Technical[6]Technical Document Styleà..àò òÛ  ÛÔ2Ô(a)Ô3  Ô€.€€ó ól<a~:Technical[7]Technical Document Styleà..àò òÛ  ÛÔ2Ôi)Ô3  Ô€.€€ó ól<a…:Technical[8]Technical Document Styleà..àò òÛ  ÛÔ2Ôa)Ô3  Ô€.€€ó óVcÒ08Document[1]Document StyleÌÔ  Ôà@ì..^àòòò òÔ  ÔÛ  ÛÔ2ÔI.Ô3  Ô€Ô  ÔÔ  ÔÔ  ÔˆÌÌóóó óV:ä8Document[2]Document StyleÌò òÛ  ÛÔ2ÔA.Ô3  Ô€òòÔ  ÔÔ  ÔÌÌó óóóVJ8Document[3]Document StyleÌà..àò òÛ  ÛÔ2Ô1.Ô3  Ô€Ô  ÔÔ  ÔÌó óVÛy8Document[4]Document Styleà..àò òòò.óó€€ó óÔ2V 9w8Document[5]Document Styleà0..àÌÌòòò.óó€€óV 9{8Document[6]Document Styleà8..àÌÌòòò.óó€€óV& —è8Document[7]Document Styleà0..àà0` ..` àÌÌÔ1.ÔV& —ì8Document[8]Document Styleà0..àà8` ..` àÌÌÔ1.Ôz` :Right Par[1]Right-Aligned Paragraph NumbersàÐ.. àÛ  ÛÔ2ÔI.Ô3  Ô€ˆà°..°àà0..àÌÌzs BÇ:Right Par[2]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..ààÐ` ..øàÛ  ÛÔ2ÔA.Ô3  Ô€ˆà..àà0` ..` àÌÌz† Çû:Right Par[3]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..àà` ..` ààи ..P àÛ  ÛÔ2Ô1.Ô3  Ô€ˆà` ..` àà0¸ ..¸ àÌÌz™ &ò:Right Par[4]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..àà` ..` àภ..¸ ààÐ..¨ àÛ  ÛÔ2Ôa.Ô3  Ô€ˆà¸ ..¸ àà0..àÌÌz­ {j:Right Par[5]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..àà` ..` àภ..¸ àà..ààÐh..ˆàÛ  ÛÔ2Ô(1)Ô3  Ô€ˆà..àà0h..hàÌÌzÀ Ä´:Right Par[6]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..àà` ..` àภ..¸ àà..ààh..hààÐÀ..ààÛ  ÛÔ2Ô(a)Ô3  Ô€ˆàh..hàà0À..ÀàÌÌzÒ Ž:Right Par[7]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..àà` ..` àภ..¸ àà..ààh..hààÀ..ÀààÐ..°àÛ  ÛÔ2Ôi)Ô3  Ô€ˆàÀ..Ààà0..àÌÌzå :Right Par[8]Right-Aligned Paragraph Numbersà..àà` ..` àภ..¸ àà..ààh..hààÀ..Ààà..ààÐp..àÛ  ÛÔ2Ôa)Ô3  Ô€ˆà..àà0p..pàÌÌ$ÿÿ"x2ÿÿ2PleadingHeader for numbered pleading paperÓ È ÓÑ   ÑÑ è ÑÖ€Ö rÝ ƒ(ÝÝ  ÝÑ  ÑÔ€ÔÓ È ÓÒ X ÒÓÿÿÀÓß6€/ 'ü°ø*–d6ßß6€/ '°ø*–d6ßÌÌàÀ..Hà1ˆÌÌàÀ..Hà2ˆÌÌàÀ..Hà3ˆÌÌàÀ..Hà4ˆÌÌàÀ..Hà5ˆÌÌàÀ..Hà6ˆÌÌàÀ..Hà7ˆÌÌàÀ..Hà8ˆÌÌàÀ..Hà9ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà10ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà11ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà12ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà13ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà14ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà15ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà16ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà17ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà18ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà19ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà20ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà21ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà22ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà23ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà24ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà25ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà26ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà27ˆÌÌàÀ..Ðà28Ô   Ô(e2î$¨¨Ý ƒ0ó_!ÝÓ  ÓÔ€XB¶XXXÔÔ€XB¶XXXB¶ÔÝ  ÝjDÿÿ4Tech InitInitialize Technical StyleÓ(€ " (ÓØØ ÿÿCuy±ÉåTechnicalTechnical Document Style11.11.1.11.1.1.11.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.1.11.1.1.1.1.1.1.1" 1.1.1.1.1.1.1.1fEÿÿ2Doc InitInitialize Document StyleÓ€%ÓÈÓ(€ )   (ÓØØ&'((ÿÿ$˜˜Ìà0 àà à(ÿÿ$™™à0 àà0 àà à((ÿÿ$ššà0 àà0 àà0 àà à  ÿÿA_ekqw‡DocumentDocument StyleI.1.A.a.(1)(a)i)a))a)R& ÿÿ8BibliogrphyBibliographyà0..àà°..°àÌÌ ÿÿCƒ‰•›£«±Right ParRight-Aligned Paragraph NumbersI.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a),a)"|xš  d(Jó_$¡¡Ó  ÓÔ€XB¶XXXÔÔ€XB¶XXXB¶Ô˜HP DeskJet 600 (Monochrome)Ȱ,,,,Ȱ0!­6+ ‡Pˆ{‰{Š{‹{ŒDUŽP{‘’D“”E•–E—˜{™š˜*ÔÌÌó óóü6xÿU‹ÿÀÀÀô\  `‹&Times New RomanÝ ƒ0ó_!ÝÓ  ÓÔ€XB¶XXXÔÔ€XB¶XXXB¶ÔÝ  ÝÔ_ÔÑ  Ñòò€à0  àà0` (#(#àóó[Ms.€of€an€article€published€inа` (#` (# ÐÔ‡9XµXXXB¶Ôñ‡ñà  àñ‡ññ‡ñà ` àñ‡ññŒññ†ñ€ñ†ññ†ñ€ñ†ññ†ñ€ñ†ññ†ñ€ñ†ññŒñSocial€Ô_ÔEpistomologyÔ_Ô€,€Vol.€12,€No.€4,1998:€321„334.Ð à Ѐ€€€ñˆñà0  àñˆññ‰ñà0` (#(#àñ‰ñññññañññññ’ñññAñññ’ññ“ñañ“ññ”ññ“ñ00ñ“ññ”ññ–ññ•ñ0ñ•ññ–ññ‘ñndñ‘ññ˜ññ—ñ€ñ—ññ˜ññ—ñ€iñ—ññ™ñnñ™ñññÐX¨` (#` (# ÐñññŽñà  àà ` àñŽñEconomic€and€Political€Weekly€€Ô_ÔXXXIIIÔ_Ô,€42€&€43,€Ð  p Ѐ€€€ñŠñà0  àñŠññ‹ñà0` (#(#àñ‹ñOct.€17-24,€1998€:2715-1723.€€€Ðè8` (#` (# ÐÔ#†XB¶XX9Xµæ#ÔòòÌÌóóSPEAKING€TRUTH€TO€POWER€ABOUT€THE€SCIENTIFIC€EMPEROR'S€CLOTHESÐ @  Ðòò€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€óó€€€€€€A€Review€Essay€Ð  d ÐÌof€òòNaked€Science.€Anthropological€Inquiry€into€Boundaries,€Power,Ð È   Ðand€Knowledgeóó€edited€by€Laura€Nader.€New€York€&€London:€Ô_ÔRoutledgeÔ_ÔÐ ¨ ø  Ð1996,€xvi,318€pp.€$€??Ð ˆØ  Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€byÐ \¬  ÐÌà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#à€€€€€€€ANDRE€GUNDER€FRANKÐT ¸ (#¸ (# Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð Ø(  Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€ñšñ€€€€University€of€TorontoÐ ¬ü  ÐÌ€€€€€€€€€€96€Asquith€Ave.€Toronto,€Ont.€Canada€M4W€1J8Ð T¤ Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Tel:416„972€0616€€Fax:416„972€0071€Ð (x Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€e„mail:€agfrank@chass.utoronto.caÐ üL Ѐhttp://www.whc.neu.edu/whc/resrch€&€Ô_ÔcurricÔ_Ô/Ô_Ôgunder.htmlÔ_ÔÐ Ð  ÐñšñÌ€€€€€à ` àPolitical€radicalism€means€speaking€truth€to€power€Ð €Ð Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€„€Barbara€EpsteinÐ T¤ Ðà  àà ` àÌà  àà ` àThe€great€enemy€of€truth€is€very€often€not€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Ð üL Ðà  àà ` àthe€lie€„€deliberate,€contrived€and€dishonest€à Ð àÐ Ð  Ðà  à€à ` à„€but€the€myth€„€persistent,€persuasive€and€à x àà Ð à€Ð ¤ô Ðà  àà ` àunrealisticÐ xÈ Ðà0  àà0` (#(#àà0¸ ` (#` (#à„€John€F.€KennedyÐLœ¸ (#¸ (# ÐÌÌ€€€€€à0 ` àComplete€objectivity€as€usually€attributed€to€the€exact€Ð È Ðsciences€is€a€delusion€and€is€in€fact€a€false€ideal.Мì` (#` (# Ѐ€€€€à0 ` àSuch€is€the€personal€participation€of€the€Ô_ÔknowerÔ_Ô€in€allÐpÀ` (#` (# ÐÒe°Òà0 ½ àà e à€€€€€à0 ½(#½(#àacts€of€understanding€[that]€comprehension€is€neither€€€Ð D” Ðan€arbitrary€act€nor€a€passive€experience,€but€a€à … àà Ý" àà @Ý" àà @Ý" àÐ h  Ðresponsible€act€claiming€universal€validity.€Such€à Ý" àà @Ý" àà @Ý" àÐ ì<! Ðknowing€is€indeed€objective€in€the€sense€of€à - àà … àÐ À " Ðestablishing€contact€with€hidden€reality.€It€seems€à Ý" àà @Ý" àÐ ”!ä# Ðreasonable€to€describe€this€fusion€of€theÐh"¸$ (# (# Ѐ€€€€à0  àpersonal€and€the€objective€as€Personal€Knowledge.Ð<#Œ% (# (# ÐÌ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€-€Michael€Ô_ÔPolanyiÔ_ÔÐ ä$4 ' Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€Chemist€&€Philosopher,€brother€of€Karl,€andÐ ¸%!( Ѐ€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€€father€of€chemistry€Nobel€Laureate€John€€€€€€€€Ð Œ&Ü!) ЀÌÌINTRODUCTORY€SUMMARYÐ )X$, ÐÌThis€book€has€its€origin€in€its€editor€Laura€Nader'sÐ °*&. Ðparticipation€in€studies€by€the€U.S.€National€Academy€ofÐ „+Ô&/ ÐScience's€Committee€on€Nuclear€and€Alternative€Energy€Systems,Ð X,¨'0 Ðone€of€which€she€oversaw€and€edited€(Nader€et€al€1980),€and€onÐ ,-|(1 Ðwhich€she€reports€in€the€Conclusion€here.€Therefore,€its€alarmingÐ .P)2 Ðor€perhaps€disarming€òòNaked€Science€óótitle€notwithstanding,€thisÐ ° Ðbook€is€also€still€sympathetic€to€the€goals€and€contributions€ofÐ à Ðscience€to€human€betterment,€even€if€that€early€experience,Ð d´ Ðexplains€Nader,€"stimulated€me€to€scrutinize€and€question€someÐ 8ˆ Ðbasic€assumptions€of€scientists€and€engineers€working€on€energyÐ  \ Ðquestions"€[p.261].€Since€then€she€and€her€collaborators€haveÐ à0 Ðexpanded€their€purview€to€other€sciences€and€technical€Ô_ÔendeavoursÔ_ÔÐ ´  Ðas€well.Ð ˆ Ø ÐÌThe€editor€explains:€"The€point€is€to€open€up€people's€minds€toÐ 0 €  Ðother€ways€of€looking€and€questioning€to€change€attitudes€aboutÐ  T  Ðknowledge,€to€Ô_ÔreframeÔ_Ô€the€organization€of€science€„€to€formulateÐ Ø (  Ðways€of€thinking€globally€about€science€traditions€....€€ThereÐ ¬ü  Ðare€different€kinds€of€knowledge€that€provide€valid€truths€of€useÐ €Ð  Ðto€human€kind.€If€a€dominant€[Western]€science€silences€thatÐ T¤  Ðknowledge,€we€all€lose....€The€myth€of€a€single€science€can€beÐ (x  Ðseen€as€a€myth;€the€false€separation€between€science€andÐ üL  ÐÔ_ÔnonscienceÔ_Ô€may€be€considered€a€barrier€to€new€thinking;€and€aÐ Ð  Ðwhole€range€of€vital€and€experimental€thinking€is€possible"€[23„Ð ¤ô Ð24].Ð xÈ ÐÌThe€central€theses€and€the€abundant€evidence€in€this€book€areÐ  p Ðthat€"science€is€not€free€of€culture;€rather,€it€is€full€of€it.Ð ôD ÐMilitarization€has€certainly€had€an€effect€on€American€science...Ð È Ð[and]€has€also€fired€the€pervasive€commercialization€of€theÐ œì Ðscientific€effort....€Politicization€of€science€is€unavoidable,Ð pÀ Ð[because]€Ô_ÔbehaviourÔ_Ô€is€affected€by€those€who€control€funding€andÐ D” Ðwho€often€determine€the€research€questions€[and]€virtually€allÐ h Ðscience€has€social€and€political€implications....€Denial€of€aÐ ì< ÐÔ_ÔcontexutalizedÔ_Ô€science,€or€the€assertion€that€science€isÐ À Ðautonomous,€strikes€at€the€scientific€Ô_ÔendeavourÔ_Ô,€defined€as€aÐ ”ä Ðprocess€of€free€inquiry"€[xiii,9].Ð h¸ ÐÌAt€superficial€first€glance,€this€argument€may€mistakenly€appearÐ  `! Ðto€be€yet€another€instance€of€the€currently€fashionable€Ð ä 4" Ðpost„modernist€and€post„colonialist€post„structuralism€thatÐ ¸!# Ðclaims€to€'Ô_ÔdeconstructÔ_Ô'€all€science€and€knowledge€to€the€point€ofÐ Œ"Ü$ Ðthe€denial€of€the€existence€of€reality€itself.€In€that€case€ofÐ `#°% Ðcourse,€€there€is€nothing€to€be€known€and/or€no€way€of€knowing€orÐ 4$„& Ðeven€inquiring€into€anything€beyond€the€completely€subjective€andÐ %X ' Ðarbitrary€ones€that€include€this€post€modern€thesis€itself.€ThisÐ Ü%,!( Ð'discourse€analysis'€of€science€not€to€mention€literature,€hasÐ °&") Ðgained€much€popularity€€among€anthropologists,€historians€andÐ „'Ô"* Ðsocial€'scientists'€and€is€mentioned€by€Pamela€Asquith€[240].€€Ð X(¨#+ ÐFortunately€for€us,€the€authors€of€this€book€do€not€adopt€thisÐ ,)|$, Ð'know„Ô_ÔnothingismÔ_Ô'€approach;€and€it€is€important€to€distinguishÐ *P%- Ðtheirs€from€those€of€all€too€many€others€in€the€West€and€SouthÐ Ô*$&. Ðwho€have€been€bitten€by€the€bug€that€carries€this€'post'€modernÐ ¨+ø&/ Ðplague,€which€has€become€a€cause€celebre€from€New€York€and€BostonÐ |,Ì'0 Ðto€New€Delhi€and€Bombay/Ô_ÔMumbaiÔ_Ô.€In€the€former,€a€storm€wasÐ P- (1 Ðcreated€by€the€publication€by€a€post„modernist€Ô_ÔhouseorganÔ_Ô€òòSocialÐ ° ÐText€óóof€an€article€that€its€politically€progressive€physicistÐ à Ðauthor€Alan€Ô_ÔSokalÔ_Ô€then€unmasked€as€a€hoax.€In€Boston€the€problemÐ pÀ Ðfor€progressives€has€been€examined€in€òòóóthe€magazine€òòZ,€óóamongÐ D” Ðothersòò.óó€New€Delhi€for€its€part€became€a€Third€World€center€ofÐ $t Ð'subaltern'€'post„colonialist'€writing€intended€to€help€liberateÐ  T Ðus€from€the€oppressions€of€colonialism,€patriarchy,€class,Ð Ø ( Ðecological€degradation,€and€yes€ideology€and€science,€which€haveÐ ¬ ü Ðall€been€scrambled€up€in€the€same€bag€to€be€discarded.€The€Ô_ÔMumbaiÔ_ÔÐ € Ð Ðjournal€Ô_ÔEPWÔ_Ô,€among€others,€has€launched€a€healthy€re„examinationÐ T ¤  Ðof€many€of€the€scientific€and€political€issues€involved.Ð ( x  ЀÌThese€argue,€as€Nader€her€collaborators€and€I€also€insist€that,Ð Ð  Ðfar€from€being€a€powerful€instrument€for€the€sub„altern€asÐ ¤ô  Ðalleged€by€some€to€liberate€themselves€from€domination,€even€fromÐ xÈ  Ðthe€use€of€science€against€them,€what€we€must€confront€is€inÐ Lœ  Ðreality€only€a€'post'€modern€version€of€the€most€widely€usedÐ  p  Ðelite€ideological€force€to€promote€subaltern€ignorance€andÐ ôD Ðsubmissiveness.€Indeed,€as€Noam€Ô_ÔChomskyÔ_Ô€rightly€insists€theÐ È Ð'post„modern'€claim€"that€we€must€abandon€the€illusions€ofÐ œì Ðscience€and€rationality€[are]€a€message€that€will€gladden€theÐ pÀ Ðhearts€of€the€powerful,€delighted€to€use€these€instruments€forÐ D” Ðtheir€own€use"€(quoted€by€Nanda€1998:915).€Or€more€explicitlyÐ h Ðciting€Ô_ÔMeeraÔ_Ô€Nanda€herself,Ð ì< ЀÌà0 ½ àa€scenario€where€truth€and€reality€are€made€internal€to€the€à @Ý" àÐ ”ä Ðsocial€[and€cultural]€context€will€leave€both€science€and€€à Ý" àÐ h¸ Ðsociety€impoverished,€and€the€worst€victims€will€be€à … àÐ <Œ Ðprecisely€those€who€Ô_ÔconstructivistsÔ_Ô€want€to€stand€up€for:€à Ý" àÐ ` Ðthe€dominated€groups,€people€on€the€margins,€especially€à Ý" àÐ ä4 Ðthose€of€the€Third€World,€who€need€€the€€findings€of€modern€à @Ý" àÐ ¸ Ðscience€to€question€some€of€Ô_ÔinegalitarianÔ_Ô€ideas€of€their€ownÐ ŒÜ Ðcultures....€Truth€...€requires€the€most€strenuous€defenseÐ `°  Ðby€à  àall€those€interested€in€justice€(Nanda€1997:316)€Ð4 „!½(#½(# ÐÌÔ_ÔSokalÔ_Ô€himself€has€written€thatÐ Ü!,# ÐÌà ½ àUnfortunately,€some€people,€starting€from€the€undoubted€factÐ „#Ô% Ðà ½ àthat€it's€difficult€to€determine€truth€„€especially€in€the€à Ý" àÐ X$¨& Ðsocial€sciences€„€have€Ô_ÔleptÔ_Ô€to€the€conclusion€that€there€is€à Ý" àÐ ,%| ' Ðno€objective€truth€at€all.€The€result€is€extreme€à Õ àÔ_ÔepistomologicalÔ_ÔÐ &P!( Ðscepticism....€It's€crucial€to€distinguish€between€the€concept€ofÐ Ô&$") Ð'truth'€and€the€concept€of€'claim€to€truth';€if€we€don't€do€that,Ð ¨'ø"* Ðwe€give€away€the€game€before€it€starts....€It€seems€to€me€thatÐ |(Ì#+ Ðtruth,€reason€and€objectivity€are€values€worth€defending€noÐ P) $, Ðmatter€what€one's€political€views;€but€for€those€of€us€on€theÐ $*t%- ÐLeft,€they€are€crucial€„€without€them,€our€critique€loses€all€itsÐ ø*H&. Ðforce....€As€Barbara€Epstein€pointed€out,€political€radicalismÐ Ì+'/ Ðmeans€speaking€truth€to€power€(Ô_ÔSokalÔ_Ô€1998:€913,914).Ð  ,ð'0 ÐÐ t-Ä(1 ÐSo€that€is€exactly€what€the€editor€and€authors€of€this€book€areÐ ° Ðtrying€to€do:€"A€plague€on€both€your€houses"€may€be€an€extremeÐ „Ô Ðand€unjust€caricature€of€their€positions,€but€they€do€reject€theÐ X¨ ÐHobson's€choice€between€two€evils.€For€while€they€share€someÐ ,| Ðpost„modernist€reservations€about€the€pretensions€of€science€andÐ P Ðadd€quite€a€few€of€their€own,€they€also€try€to€retain€or€achieveÐ Ô$ Ðfar€more€real€world€realism€than€most€post„modernists€who€denyÐ ¨ ø Ðall€scientific€truth.€€Instead,€òòNaked€Scienceóó€seeks€and€proposesÐ | Ì Ða€third€option€which€is€to€subject€science€itself€it€to€theÐ \ ¬ Ðempirical€and€analytical€rigors€of€objective€scientific€method,Ð 0 €  Ðas€least€as€far€as€it€can€take€them.€And€that€is€quite€a€ways.Ð  T  ÐÌIn€short,€they€are€so€politically€radical€as€to€speak€truth€toÐ ¬ü  Ðpower€even€about€science€itself.Ð €Ð  ÐÌThe€editor€and€the€contributors€[twelve€other€anthropologists,Ð (x  Ðthree€medicinal€plant€pharmacologists,€two€students€of€bio„Ð üL  Ðmedicine€and€bio„technology,€two€historians€of€science,€oneÐ Ð  Ðphysicist€and€one€sociologist]€also€understand€that€their€thesisÐ ¤ô Ðis€not€new.€But€the€pervasive€neglect€or€even€denial€in€both€theÐ xÈ Ðscientific€and€popular€communities€of€the€prostitution€and€mis„Ð Lœ Ðuse€of€'science'€requires€yet€another€€"picture€[that]€departsÐ  p Ðradically€from€ideologies€of€science,€and€allows€us€to€re„viewÐ ôD Ðscience€afresh,€plain,€and€undecorated....€The€significance€of€aÐ È Ðnaked€science€„€an€open€science€stripped€of€its€ideologicalÐ œì Ðvestments€„€is€worth€serious€thought."Ð pÀ ÐÌSo,€what€is€there€in€common€among€South€Sea€navigation€andÐ h ÐAtlantic€fisheries€management;€and€Maya€herbal€medicine€andÐ ì< Ðimmunology,€DNA€sequencing€in€molecular€biology,€the€'human€gnomeÐ À Ðproject,'€and€primatology€in€the€West€and€Japan;€as€well€asÐ ”ä Ðnuclear€physics€in€Japan€and€testing€American€nuclear€weapons€andÐ h¸ Ðsurveillance€of€€Russian€testing;€with€other€scientific€researchÐ <Œ  Ðand€its€selection,€finance€and€administration€including€Ô_ÔInuitÔ_Ô€andÐ  `! ÐWestern€knowledge€[some€also€for€military€purposes]€of€theÐ ä 4" ÐArctic;€let€alone€mathematics€for€every€Ô_ÔwoÔ_Ô/man,€the€sociology€ofÐ ¸!# Ðknowledge€and€a€discussion€of€'when€is€science€scientific'€inÐ Œ"Ü$ ÐòòPhysics€Today€óó?€They€are€all€case€studies€in€a€book€written€"toÐ `#°% Ðexamine€science€through€a€distant€mirror€as€well€as€through€aÐ @$& Ðmagnifying€glass€...€that€should€be€read€as€if€it€were€written€byÐ %d ' Ðone€author,€although€it€is€unlikely€to€have€been"€[p.€23].€Ð è%8!( ÐÌThere€are€several€ways€to€organize€such€serious€thought€about€theÐ 'à"* Ðmatter,€and€this€book€reflects€some€more€than€others.€However,Ð d(´#+ Ðall€of€them€demonstrate€that€we€need€and€must€not€make€theÐ 8)ˆ$, Ðalleged€Hobson's€choice€between€accepting€"science"€as€is€andÐ  *\%- Ðrejecting€it€altogether€"post„modern"€fashion.€We€also€have€otherÐ à*0&. Ðpolitical€choices€„€and€indeed€scientific€obligations€„€toÐ ´+'/ Ðexamine€both€of€them€more€objectively€in€the€pursuit€of€betterÐ ˆ,Ø'0 Ðknowledge€to€help€us€become€more€free.€The€editors€andÐ \-¬(1 Ðcontributors€propose€the€following€approaches€and€arguments:€1.Ð ° Ð"Science€is€supposedly€culture„free,€but€studies€of€scienceÐ „Ô Ðpractice€suggest€it€is€not"€[11].€Abundant€evidence€is€suppliedÐ X¨ Ðin€several€chapters€particularly€about€nuclear€physics€and€byÐ ,| Ðextensive€quotations€in€the€conclusion€from€practicing€scientistsÐ P Ðtoday.€2.€"In€several€quarters,€a€reexamination€of€what€we€callÐ Ô$ Ðscience€is€underway€...€[that€has]€revealed€that€ideals€about€theÐ ¨ ø Ðscientific€enterprise€show€a€less€than€perfect€Ô_ÔisomorphismÔ_Ô€withÐ | Ì Ðactual€practice"€[239].€That€is€the€case€for€the€reexamination€ofÐ P   Ðwestern€science€in€about€half€the€chapters€of€this€book,€it€andÐ $ t  Ðalso€marks€much€Ô_ÔepistomologyÔ_Ô€of€science€and€the€'science'Ð ø H  Ðsciences€themselves,€into€which€this€book€inquires€less.€3.€"TheÐ Ì   Ðdominant€Western€tradition€of€science€is€one€among€manyÐ  ð  Ðtraditions"€[8]€and€"other€rationalities€may€count€as€science"Ð tÄ  Ð[239].€Some€of€these€are€exemplified€in€the€other€half€of€theÐ H˜  Ðchapters€on€'traditional'€science€among€various€other€peoplesÐ l  Ðincluding€Japan.€4.€"Historians€of€science€who€describe€scienceÐ ð@  Ðas€a€tradition€originating€from€Europe€are€incorrect€and€ignorantÐ Ä Ðof€the€remarkably€diverse€scientific€traditions"€[8].€The€editorÐ ˜è Ðgoes€on€to€refer€to€different€traditions€in€Europe€itself.€€ButÐ l¼ Ðexcept€for€Asquith's€[239„240]€chapter€14€on€primatology€in€JapanÐ @ Ðand€her€passing€reference€[239„24]€to€other€science,€this€bookÐ d Ðdoes€not€but€I€do€inquire€also€into€the€history€of€science€andÐ è8 Ðtechnology€elsewhere€in€the€world.€Ð ¼  ÐÌI.€WESTERN€SCIENCE€IS€NOT€SO€AUTONOMOUSLY€VALUE€FREEÐ d´ ÐÌ"Public€discourse€about€science€is€still€saturated€with€notionsÐ  \ Ðof€science€as€autonomous,€value€free,€and€Ô_ÔomincompetentÔ_Ô€in€spiteÐ à0 Ðof€25€years€of€science€studies€that€have€documented€the€linksÐ ´ Ðbetween€science€and€society,€and€described€science€as€foremost€aÐ ˆØ Ðhuman€enterprise"€[23].€Nader€hammers€this€theme€home€again€andÐ \¬ Ðagain€in€her€preface,€Introduction€to€"Anthropological€InquiryÐ 0€  Ðinto€Boundaries,€Power,€and€Knowledge"€and€in€her€conclusion€onÐ  T! Ð"Magic,€Science€and€Religion"€to€quote€Ô_ÔBronislawÔ_Ô€Ô_ÔMalinovskiÔ_Ô.€€SoÐ Ø (" Ðdo€her€contributors'€case€studies€and€additional€analyses.€So€€weÐ ¬!ü# Ðmay€ask,€is€the€glass€half€full€or€half€empty?€€And€which€glass?Ð €"Ð$ ÐIf€25€years,€and€indeed€far€more,€of€documentation€have€beenÐ T#¤% Ðinsufficient€to€disabuse€much€public€discourse€of€its€illusionsÐ ($x& Ðand€some€science€of€its€pretensions,€why€pour€still€another€suchÐ ü$L ' Ðcollection,€this€one€mostly€by€anthropologists,€€into€the€glassÐ Ð% !( Ðor€hope€that€it€will€leave€make€a€noticeable€difference?€PerhapsÐ ¤&ô!) Ðit€is€enough€to€ask€the€question€to€intimate€an€answer.Ð x'È"* ÐÌSpeaking€of€anthropologists,€Nader€points€out€that€Ô_ÔMalinovskiÔ_ÔÐ  )p$, Ðalso€held€a€doctorate€in€physics€and€mathematics€and€in€his€aboveÐ ô)D%- Ðquoted€book€published€in€1925€already€showed€how€magic,€religion,Ð È*&. Ðand€science€interact€not€only€in€the€Ô_ÔTrobriandÔ_Ô€islands€that€heÐ œ+ì&/ Ðstudied,€but€as€Nader€claims€well€nigh€universally.€Alas€as€NaderÐ p,À'0 Ðalso€notes,€his€followers€have€focused€on€the€first€two€andÐ D-”(1 Ðlargely€neglected€and€forgotten€their€connection€to€science€asÐ ° Ðwell.€Yet€her€conclusion€[261„€quotes€one€contemporary€scientistsÐ „Ô Ðafter€another€to€the€effect€that€"they€find€difficulty€inÐ X¨ Ðdistinguishing€science€from€pseudoscience,"€are€"full€ofÐ ,| Ðobservations€on€unexamined€assumptions...often€made€on€the€basisÐ P Ðof€faith€...€[and]€the€predominance€of€group„think:€people€whoÐ Ô$ Ðthought€differently€than€the€group€were€told€they€were€off€theÐ ¨ ø Ðtrack€...€[and]€are€bullied€into€silence€by€those€who€prevail€inÐ | Ì Ðthe€upper€echelons€of€planning€„€whether€it€be€think€tank,Ð P   Ðgovernment€or€academy€based€...€[so€that]€communication€becomesÐ $ t  Ðtop„down€...[and]€the€educational€process€does€little€to€enhanceÐ ø H  Ðoriginal€thinking€and€a€great€deal€to€stop€it."€€Steve€Fuller'sÐ Ì   Ðrecent€survey€entitled€òòScienceóó€confirms€"given€that€scientists€soÐ  ð  Ðrarely€break€rank€with€disciplinary€norms€Ô_Ô„„Ô_Ô€and€quickly€closeÐ €Ð  Ðranks€against€those€who€do€„„€how€can€one€tell€whetherÐ T¤  Ðconvergence€is€being€pushed€or€pulled?"€(Fuller€1997:18).Ð (x  ÐMoreover,€he€cites€an€'experiment':€already€published€articlesÐ üL  Ðwere€rejected€for€publication€when€they€were€resubmitted€by€theirÐ Ð  Ðauthors€now€claiming€to€be€from€low€status€universitiesÐ ¤ô Ð(ibid.24).€An€editor€of€the€house„organ€of€a€major€AmericanÐ xÈ Ðprofessional€association€admitted€to€his€colleagues€that€one€ofÐ Lœ Ðhis€major€criteria€for€publication/rejection€of€articles€was€theÐ  p Ðname€òòóóof€the€university€from€which€the€papers€were€submitted.Ð ôD ÐÌNader's€collaborators€offer€case€studies€of€how€"much€scientificÐ œì Ðresearch€is€encouraged€or€constrained€by€the€ways€in€which€theirÐ pÀ Ðfields€relate€to€public€issues.€At€the€least,€the€funding€forÐ D” Ðresearch€comes€from€governments,€foundations,€and€privateÐ h Ðcorporations€that€have€agendas€determining€which€research€isÐ ì< Ðviewed€favorably€and€receives€financial€support€and€which€is€not"Ð À Ð[Ô_ÔEstellieÔ_Ô€Smith:202].€Chapter€and€verse€documentation€of€the€sameÐ ”ä Ðand€how€it€is€politically€and€ethically€rationalized€appears€inÐ h¸ Ðparticular€in€chapter€8€on€"Political€Structuring€of€theÐ <Œ  ÐInstitutions€of€Science"€in€the€United€States€by€Charles€SchwartzÐ  `! Ðand€in€Chapter€10€on€"Japanese€Physicists'€Strategies€for€MovingÐ ä 4" Ðinto€the€International€Political€Economy€of€Science"€by€SharonÐ ¸!# ÐÔ_ÔTraweekÔ_Ô.€€€The€role€of€political€economy€in€science€is€furtherÐ Œ"Ü$ Ðexemplified€in€chapter€7€on€"Nuclear€Weapons€Testing"€in€theÐ `#°% ÐUnited€States€and€Russia€subtitled€"Scientific€Experiment€asÐ 4$„& ÐPolitical€Ritual"€by€Hugh€Ô_ÔGustersonÔ_Ô€and€in€chapter€13€by€DavidÐ %X ' ÐJacobson€and€Charles€Ziegler€who€show€how€'popular€delusions'Ð Ü%,!( Ðoutsmarted€'scientific€beliefs'€regarding€the€progress€of€SovietÐ °&") Ðnuclear€bomb€program.€€Analogous€socio„political€influences€on€Ð „'Ô"* ÐDNA€sequencing€in€molecular€biology€are€found€in€Chapter€by€JoanÐ X(¨#+ ÐÔ_ÔFujimuraÔ_Ô€and€Michael€Ô_ÔFortunÔ_Ô€and€in€chapter€5€by€five€authors€onÐ ,)|$, Ðimmunology.€€Beyond€these€excursions€into€the€social€and€culturalÐ *P%- Ðanthropology€of€science,€in€chapter€6€Troy€Duster€also€inquiresÐ Ô*$&. Ðinto€the€"Sociology€of€Knowledge"€and€how€it€is€popularlyÐ ¨+ø&/ Ðdiffused€as€a€function€of€race€and€class.€Ð |,Ì'0 ÐÐ P- (1 ÐNor€are€scientists€otherwise€or€those€who€benefit€from€their€work€Ð ° Ðaltogether€disinterested.€Ô_ÔñzñÔ€&MÓ%XXB¶ÔÔ€XB¶X%&MÓÔñzñTheÔ_Ô€by€now€already€€notoriousÐ „Ô Ðcommercialization€and€indeed€corporate€sponsorship€of€research€inÐ X¨ Ðallegedly€'academically€free'€universities€is€increasinglyÐ ,| Ðbuttering€their€bread€on€one€side.€A€study€published€in€òòScienceÐ P Ðand€Engineering€Ethics€óódocumented€that€one€third€of€the€articlesÐ à0 Ðpublished€in€leading€biology€journals€were€written€by€one€oròò€óómoreÐ À  Ðauthors€who€had€a€private€financial€interest€in€the€publishedÐ   ð Ðresearch€„„€none€of€whom€however€disclosed€this€detail€in€theÐ t Ä Ðpublication.òòà m àóóOn€the€other€hand€as€Fuller€(1997:60)€alsoÐ H ˜  Ðconcludes,€"appealing€to€scientific€authority€has€proved€to€beÐ  l  Ðthe€most€palatable€means€of€democratic€governments€to€coerce€theÐ ð @  Ðpeople€of€the€earth."€€Of€course,€that€practice€is€not€limited€toÐ Ä  Ðgovernment,€as€television€advertisements€of€everything€from€soapÐ ˜è  Ðto€pills€amply€testify.Ð l¼  ÐÌÌThe€pervasiveness€of€magic€and€religion,€let€alone€politicalÐ è8 Ðeconomic€power,€in€science€is€also€illustrated€in€òòScience,Ð ¼  Ðóópublished€by€the€American€Association€for€the€Advancement€ofÐ œì ÐScience.€Almost€every€issue€and€especially€their€editorials€carryÐ pÀ Ðreports€and€critiques€of€governmental€finance,€its€reductions€orÐ D” Ðits€privatization€and€their€implications€for€and€constraints€onÐ h Ðscientific€theory€and€praxis.€Occasionally,€there€are€alsoÐ ì< Ðreports€of€overt€or€covert€censorship.€Almost€an€entire€recentÐ À Ðissue€[€xx]€was€devoted€to€debates€on€how€compatible€or€notÐ ”ä Ðscience€„€and€not€only€or€even€primarily€Darwinian€Ô_ÔevolutionismÔ_ÔÐ h¸ Ðbut€also€cosmology€and€physics€„€are€with€religion,€not€toÐ <Œ Ðmention€magic.€Ð ` ÐÌSo€€Ô_ÔMalinovskiÔ_Ô€and€Nader€cannot€be€very€far€off€the€mark€stillÐ ¸ Ðtoday€as€they€also€are€not€for€the€past€that€often€goesÐ ŒÜ Ðunmentioned:€Newton€(1642„1727),€the€father€of€modern€physics€ifÐ `°  Ðnot€of€all€western€science,€"maintained€a€prolonged,€intenseÐ 4 „! Ðinvolvement€with€alchemy.€So,€too,€did€John€Locke€(1532„1704)andÐ !X" ÐRobert€Boyle€(1627„1691)€(Adams€1996:54€citing€Richard€Ô_ÔWestfallÔ_ÔÐ Ü!,# Ðon€"Newton€and€Alchemy."€€Another€one€example€of€the€use€ofÐ °"$ Ðscientific€interest€and€engagement€was€the€Venetian€Ô_ÔGiovanÔ_Ô€MariaÐ „#Ô% ÐÔ_ÔBonardoÔ_Ô€who€found€in€his€1589€study€of€òòThe€Size,€and€Distance€ofÐ X$¨& ÐAll€Spheres€Reduced€to€Our€Miles€óóthat€"hell€is€3,758€and€1/4Ð ,%| ' Ðmiles€from€us€and€has€a€width€of€2,505€and€Ô_Ô1/2Ô_Ô€miles€[while]Ð &P!( ÐHeaven€is€1,799,995,500€miles€away€from€us"€(cited€in€Ô_ÔCipollaÔ_ÔÐ Ô&$") Ð1976:226).€Ð ¨'ø"* ÐÌII.€IS€WESTERN€SCIENCE€SCIENTIFIC?Ð P) $, ÐÌThis€question€has€many€ramifications€and€ambiguities€that€may€beÐ ø*H&. Ðof€interest€to€and€can€be€considered€elsewhere€in€òòSocialÐ Ì+'/ ÐÔ_ÔEpistomologyÔ_Ôóó.€I€confine€myself€to€setting€the€largelyÐ ¬,ü'0 Ðanthropological€discussion€of€òòNaked€Science€óóinto€an€onlyÐ Œ-Ü(1 Ðselectively€broader€epistemological€and€scientific€context.€WeÐ ° Ðmay€begin€with€the€much€vaunted€'seventeenth€century€scientificÐ „Ô Ðrevolution'€that€allegedly€took€place€in€Europe.€€To€begin€with,Ð X¨ Ðauthoritative€observers€from€Francis€Bacon€to€Thomas€KuhnÐ ,| Ðconclude€that,€however€"revolutionary"€or€not,€these€scientificÐ P Ðadvances€appear€to€have€had€NO€immediate€impact€on€technologyÐ Ô$ Ðwhatsoever€and€certainly€none€on€the€industrial€"revolution,"Ð ¨ ø Ðwhich€did€not€even€begin€until€a€century€later.€The€contemporaryÐ | Ì ÐBacon€already€observed€"the€overmuch€credit€that€hath€been€givenÐ P   Ðunto€authors€in€sciences€[for€alleged€contributions€to]€artsÐ $ t  Ðmechanical€[and€their]€first€deviser"€[cited€in€Adams€1996:56).Ð ø H  ÐThree€centuries€later,€Kuhn€looked€back€over€òò€The€Structure€ofÐ Ì   ÐScientific€Revolutionóó€and€observed€[in€a€later€publication]€thatÐ  ð  Ð"I€think€nothing€but€mythology€prevents€our€realizing€quite€howÐ tÄ  Ðlittle€the€development€of€the€intellect€need€have€had€to€do€withÐ H˜  Ðthat€of€technology€during€all€but€the€most€recent€stage€of€humanÐ l  Ðhistory"€(cited€in€Adams€1996:56„57).€Robert€Adams€(1996)€himselfÐ ð@  Ðreviews€any€and€all€relations€between€technology€and€science,Ð Ä Ðalso€cites€numerous€other€observers€and€€concludes€on€at€least€aÐ ˜è Ðdozen€occasions€(ibid:€56,€60,€62,€65,€67,€72,€98,€101,€103,€131,Ð l¼ Ð137,€256)€that€scientists€and€their€science€made€NO€significantÐ @ Ðvisible€contribution€to€new€technology€before€the€late€nineteenthÐ d Ðcentury.€€So€whatever€the€contribution€of€western€science€toÐ è8 Ðtechnology€and€life€in€general€may€be,€it€is€barely€a€centuryÐ ¼  Ðold.Ð à ЀÌIndeed,€the€opening€sentence€of€Steven€Shapin's€(1996)€recentÐ 8ˆ Ðstudy€of€the€subject€is€that€"there€was€no€seventeenth€centuryÐ  \ Ðscientific€revolution,€and€this€book€is€about€it."€€Moreover,Ð à0 ÐShapin€devotes€a€chapter€to€the€question€of€"What€was€theÐ ´ Ð[scientific]€Knowledge€for?"€whose€subtitles€refer€to€naturalÐ ˆØ Ðphilosophy,€state€power,€religion's€handmaid,€nature€and€God,Ð \¬ Ðwisdom€and€will,€but€not€to€technology€(Shapin€1996:140).€So€theÐ 0€  Ðoverwhelming€evidence€is€that€the€alleged€contribution€ofÐ  T! Ðseventeenth,€eighteenth,€or€even€early€nineteenth€century€scienceÐ Ø (" Ðto€technology€or€to€the€industrial€revolution€is€no€more€thanÐ ¬!ü# Ð'mythology'€as€Kuhn€aptly€termed€it.€€€Therefore,€it€is€just€asÐ €"Ð$ Ðwell€and€most€welcome€that€Cohen€(1994:500)€ends€by€asking€"IsÐ T#¤% Ðthe€[fifty€year€old€concept€of]€'Scientific€Revolution'€going€theÐ ($x& Ðway€of€all€historical€concepts?"€€"Perhaps"€he€answers,€for€"theÐ ü$L ' Ðconcept€has€by€now€fulfilled€its€once€useful€services;€the€timeÐ Ð% !( Ðhas€come€to€discard€it.€After€all,€historical€concepts€areÐ ¤&ô!) Ðnothing€but€metaphors,€which€one€should€beware€to€reify."€Ð x'È"* ÐÌThese€evaluations€of€the€alleged€origins€of€science€may€beÐ  )p$, Ðthought€to€be€no€more€than€the€latest€manifestations€of€anÐ ô)D%- Ðepistemological€train€of€thought€whose€important€milepostsÐ È*&. Ðinclude€Karl€Popper€(1985)€and€his€€critique€of€positivism,Ð œ+ì&/ ÐThomas€Kuhn€(1967)€and€the€paradigms€of€his€òòThe€Structure€ofÐ p,À'0 ÐScientific€Revolution€óóand€Paul€Ô_ÔFeyerabendÔ_Ô€€with€his€òòAgainstÐ P- (1 ÐMethod€€óó(1975)€and€òòFarewell€to€Reasonóó€(1987).€€Their€influenceÐ ° Ðhas€been€widespread,€but€it€cannot€be€solely€or€even€primarilyÐ à Ðattributed€to€or€dismissed€as€the€recent€popularity€of€postÐ d´ Ðmodernism.Ð 8ˆ ÐÌFor€the€certainties€of€science€have€also€increasingly€been€putÐ à0 Ðinto€question€by€scientists€themselves,€including€Nobel€laureatesÐ ´  Ðin€physics€and€chemistry.€Forerunners€and€best€known€are€WernerÐ ˆ Ø ÐHeisenberg€and€his€'principle€of€indeterminacy'€according€toÐ \ ¬ Ðwhich€even€physical€observations€of€physical€phenomena€areÐ 0 €  Ðsubject€to€errors€of€measurement€that€are€a€function€of€theÐ  T  Ðobserver's€observation€itself€and€Ô_ÔGoedelÔ_Ô's€'uncertainty€theorem'Ð Ø (  Ðaccording€to€which€no€system€can€be€exhaustively€defined€withinÐ ¬ü  Ðits€own€terms.€The€latter€was€popularized€by€xx€in€his€bestsellerÐ €Ð  ÐòòÔ_ÔGoedelÔ_Ô,€Ô_ÔEscherÔ_Ô,€Bachóó.€Ð T¤  ÐÌJames€Ô_ÔGlieckÔ_Ô€(1987)€wrote€another€best„seller,€òòChaos:€Making€aÐ X  ÐNew€Scienceóó€that€offers€biographical€sketches€of€mathematicians,Ð è8 Ðcomputer€scientists,€astronomers,€physicists,€chemists,Ð È Ðbiologists,€meteorologists,€economists,€statisticians€and€others.Ð œì ÐRepeated€bifurcations€in€the€possible€directions€of€pathÐ pÀ ÐÔ_ÔtravelledÔ_Ô€exclude€some€consequences€while€making€others€moreÐ D” Ðprobable,€but€can€also€cause€the€'butterfly€effect'€through€whichÐ h Ða€flap€of€its€wings€in€the€Amazon€can€change€the€weather€in€NewÐ ì< ÐYork.€Another€illustrative€finding€and€principle€are€Mandelbrot'sÐ À Ð'Ô_ÔfractalsÔ_Ô'€in€which€real€and€imaginary€things,€like€the€coastlineÐ ”ä Ðof€an€island,€are€identifiable€as€having€ever€smaller€and€moreÐ h¸ Ðnumerous€outer€edges€[and€indeed€inner€constituents]€„€butÐ <Œ Ðinfinitely€so.€The€same€seems€to€apply€to€the€production€andÐ ` Ðdissemination€of€the€theory€of€chaos€or€complexity€itself€[orÐ ä4 ÐÔ_ÔchaoplexityÔ_Ô€as€John€Ô_ÔHorganÔ_Ô€(1997)€has€re„Ô_ÔbabtizedÔ_Ô€it],€which€hasÐ ¸ Ðalready€generated€another€dozen€books€to€popularize€it.€Ð ŒÜ ÐÌThese€scientists€not€only€accept€Heisenberg's€and€Ô_ÔGoedelÔ_Ô'sÐ 4 „! Ðindeterminacy€and€uncertainty€in€science.€They€ò òuseó ó€the€same€toÐ !X" Ðconstruct€their€own€scientific€theories€and€their€experimentalÐ è!8# Ðtests€based€on€'òòOrder€Out€of€Chaosóó.'€That€was€the€title€of€theÐ ¼" $ Ðopening€gun€by€the€laureate€in€chemistry,€Ilya€Ô_ÔPrigogineÔ_Ô€(and€I.Ð œ#ì% ÐÔ_ÔStengersÔ_Ô€1984)€who€now€offers€the€culmination€of€his€and€theirÐ p$À& Ðco„workers'€endeavors€as€òòThe€End€of€Certainty:€Time,€Chaos€andÐ D%” ' Ðthe€New€Laws€of€Natureóó€òò(óó1997).€That€extends€the€same€from€theÐ $&t!( Ðphysical€sciences€also€to€the€social€ones,€as€in€òòOpening€theÐ 'T") ÐSocial€Sciences€óóby€Immanuel€Wallerstein€(1997)€written€with€theÐ ä'4#* Ðcollaboration€among€others€of€Ô_ÔPrigogineÔ_Ô.€The€feared€or€allegedÐ Ä($+ Ðdistinction€and€gap€between€the€'hard'€physical€and€the€'soft'Ð ˜)è$, Ðsocial€sciences€are€being€closed€by€both€sides.Ð l*¼%- ÐÌÔ_ÔPrigogineÔ_Ô€himself€writes€"I€believe€we€are€at€an€importantÐ ,d'/ Ðturning€point€in€the€history€of€science€...€paved€by€Galileo€andÐ è,8(0 ÐNewton,€which€presented€us€with€an€image€of€a€time„reversible,Ð ¼- )1 Ðdeterministic€universe.€We€now€see€the€erosion€of€determinism€andÐ ° Ðthe€emergence€of€a€new€formulation€of€the€laws€of€physics"€thatÐ „Ô Ðare€no€more€than€probabilistic€but€may€apply€universally,Ð X¨ Ðalthough€"many€questions€still€await€answers€[in]€an€adventure€ofÐ ,| Ðscience€in€the€making"€Ô_ÔPrigogeneÔ_Ô€1997:€Ô_Ôx,ixÔ_Ô).€Indeed€to€furtherÐ P Ðthe€same,€the€Santa€Fe€Institute€has€been€established€as€a€wellÐ Ô$ Ðfinanced€innovative€research€center€devoted€to€the€application€ofÐ ¨ ø Ðchaos€theory€to€more€and€more€concerns,€which€according€to€someÐ | Ì Ðmust€yield€increasingly€diminishing€returns.€That€leads,Ð P   Ðaccording€to€the€title€of€òòScientific€Americanóó€editor€John€HoganÐ $ t  Ð(1996)€and€his€also€best„selling€book€to€òòThe€End€of€Science.Ð  T  ÐFacing€the€Limits€of€Knowledge€in€the€Twilight€of€the€ScientificÐ ä 4  ÐAgeóó.€Ð ¬ü  ÐÌIII.€OTHER€PEOPLES,€OTHER€SCIENCEÐ `°  ÐÌOf€course,€"science,€after€all,€can€be€defined€so€that€nothingÐ X  Ðoutside€a€Western€tradition€will€be€admissible.Ð Ü, ÐYet,€if€science€is€considered€an€Ô_ÔepistomologyÔ_Ô€in€the€sense€of€aÐ ° Ðcoherent,€internally€logical,€and€systematic€way€of€orderingÐ „Ô Ðknowledge€about€the€world,€and€which€has€predictive€and€testableÐ X¨ Ðcapabilities,€other€rationalities€may€count€as€science"€arguesÐ ,| ÐPamela€Asquith€speaking€for€all€her€co„authors€[239].€SoÐ P Ðtheir€answer€to€the€question€"Science€for€the€West,€Myth€for€theÐ Ô$ ÐRest?,"€as€Colin€Scott€entitles€chapter€3,€is€a€resounding€NO:Ð ¨ø Ð"The€achievements€of€indigenous€ecological€knowledge,€asÐ |Ì Ðillustrated€in€the€case€of€Cree€hunters€[in€northern€Canada]Ð P  Ðresult€from€intellectual€processes€not€qualitatively€differentÐ $t Ðfrom€those€of€Western€science"€[84].Ð øH ÐÌThe€prima€facie€case€for€this€proposition,€which€is€so€obviousÐ  ð Ðthat€it€is€hardly€ever€made,€is€that€'indigenous'€peoples€manageÐ tÄ Ðquite€well€and€often€better€in€the€world,€thank€you,€without€andÐ H˜  Ðbefore€being€blessed€by€the€power€of€western€science€[or€theÐ  l! Ðscience€of€western€power].€€As€Ô_ÔMalinovskiÔ_Ô€put€it,€they€manage€toÐ ð @" Ðcombine€'secular'€science€with€'sacred'€magic€and€religion.€SoÐ Ä!# Ðdid€and€still€do€any€number€of€western€scientists€as€we€observedÐ ˜"è$ Ðfrom€Newton€to€Ô_ÔPrigogeneÔ_Ô.Ð l#¼% ÐÌTherefore,€the€western€notion€of€'the€West€vs.€the€Rest'€thatÐ %d ' ÐSamuel€Huntington€now€uses€in€his€òòthe€Clash€of€Civilizationsóó€orÐ è%8!( Ðindeed€the€'civilization€and€barbarism'€of€the€nineteenth€centuryÐ È&") ÐArgentinean€Sarmiento€and€the€'primitivism'€of€someÐ œ'ì"* Ðanthropologists€are€themselves€no€more€than€western€mythologyÐ p(À#+ Ðused€as€a€magic€wand€to€confound€others€and€delude€ourselves.€TheÐ D)”$, Ðvery€invention€of€'West'€and€'East'€was€already€denounced€byÐ *h%- ÐHerodotus€and€that€of€'Ô_ÔOccidentalismÔ_Ô'€and€'Ô_ÔOrientalismÔ_Ô'€wasÐ ì*<&. Ð'Ô_ÔdeconstructedÔ_Ô'€by€Edward€Said€(1978)€and€Ô_ÔBernalÔ_Ô€(1987),€not€toÐ À+'/ Ðmention€the€'post„colonial'€'subaltern€studies'€school€of€post„Ð ”,ä'0 Ðmodernists.Ð h-¸(1 ЇThe€identification€and€critique€of€this€Eurocentric€mythologyÐ ° Ðalso€precedes€€and€can€go€well€beyond€post€modernism.€This€bookÐ „Ô Ðalso€documents€the€real€practice€of€science,€not€to€mentionÐ X¨ Ðtechnology,€in€the€real€world€beyond€the€West.€But€it€begins€withÐ ,| ÐNader's€approving€citation€of€Oscar€Ô_ÔKwagleyÔ_Ô's€critique€of€theÐ P Ðfollowing€derivative€and/or€constituent€Ô_ÔdisjuncturesÔ_Ô:€Ð Ô$ ÐÌprimitiveà  àà m àà Å àà0  àcivilizedÐ| Ì(#(# Ðtraditionalà m àà Å àà  àmodernÐ P   Ðscienceà  àà m àà Å àà  àknowledgeÐ $ t  Ðscienceà  àà m àà Å àà  àreligionÐ ø H  Ðrational€à  àà m àà Å àà  àmagicalÐ Ì   Ðparticular/Ô_ÔistÔ_Ô€à Å àà  àuniversal/Ô_ÔistÔ_ÔÐ  ð  Ðpracticalà  àà m àà Å àà  àtheoreticalÐ tÄ  Ðunderdevelopedà m àà Å àà  àdevelopedÐ H˜  ÐÌYet,€all€these€Eurocentric€Ô_ÔWeberianÔ_Ô€'ideal€type'€Ô_ÔdisjuncturesÔ_ÔÐ ð@  Ðalready€had€nineteenth€century€sociological€great„grandfathers€inÐ Ä Ðthe€"father€of€sociology"€Ô_ÔAugusteÔ_Ô€Compte€and€in€Sir€Henry€MaineÐ ˜è Ðwho€distinguished€€between€supposedly€new€forms€of€thinking€andÐ l¼ Ðof€social€organization€based€on€"science"€and"contract,"€whichÐ @ Ðallegedly€replaced€age€old€"traditional"€ones.€One€grandfatherÐ d Ðwas€Emile€Ô_ÔDurkheimÔ_Ô€who€idealized€"organic"€vs.€"mechanical"€formsÐ è8 Ðof€social€organization€and€another€was€Ferdinand€Ô_ÔToennisÔ_Ô,€whoÐ ¼  Ðalleged€a€transition€from€traditional€"Ô_ÔGemeinschaftÔ_Ô"€to€modernÐ à Ð"Ô_ÔGesellschaftÔ_Ô."€In€a€later€generation,€Ô_ÔTalcottÔ_Ô€Parsons€idealizedÐ d´ Ð"universalist"€vs.€"Ô_ÔparticularistÔ_Ô"€social€forms,€and€RobertÐ 8ˆ ÐÔ_ÔRedfieldÔ_Ô€claimed€to€have€found€a€contrast€and€transition€or€atÐ  \ Ðleast€a€continuum"€between€traditional€"folk"€and€modern€"urban"Ð à0 Ðsociety€and€a€certain€symbiosis€between€"low"€and€"highÐ ´ Ðcivilization."€The€Marxist€and€contemporary€neo„Marxist€versionÐ ˆØ Ðis€the€alleged€fundamental€difference€between€"Asiatic,"€"feudal"Ð \¬ Ðor€other€forms€of€"tributary"€and€the€"capitalist"€mode€ofÐ 0€  Ðproduction€(Wolf€1982,€Amin€1991,1993,€1996).€The€archetype€ofÐ  T! Ðthis€allegedly€scientific€mythology€of€European€'Ô_ÔexceptionalismÔ_Ô'Ð Ø (" Ðis€aptly€entitled€€òòThe€European€Miracleóó€(Jones€1981).€However,€itÐ ¬!ü# Ðalso€underlies€books€similarly€revealing€titles€like€[but€alasÐ Œ"Ü$ Ðnot€analyses€of]€òòHow€It€All€Began:€Origins€of€the€Modern€EconomyÐ `#°% Ðóó(Rostow€1975),€òòThe€Rise€of€the€Western€World€óóby€Nobel€prizeÐ @$& Ðwinner€€Douglass€North€and€Robert€Paul€Thomas€(1973),€òòHow€theÐ %d ' ÐWest€Grew€Richóó€by€Rosenberg€and€Ô_ÔBridzellÔ_Ô€(1986),€òòóóand€still€inÐ è%8!( Ð1998€in€the€much€heralded€òòThe€Wealth€and€Poverty€of€Nationsóó€byÐ ¼& ") ÐDavid€Landes.Ð 'à"* ÐÌThis€Ô_ÔEurocentrismÔ_Ô€will€be€critiqued€directly€below€after€brieflyÐ 8)ˆ$, Ðreviewing€some€of€the€case€study€€illustrations€of€'indigenousÐ  *\%- Ðscience'€in€this€book,€which€attack€the€same€more€indirectly.€TheÐ à*0&. Ðfirst€one€is€by€Ward€Ô_ÔGoodenoughÔ_Ô€who€reports€on€"Navigation€in€theÐ ´+'/ ÐWestern€Ô_ÔCarolinesÔ_Ô.€A€Traditional€Science"€in€chapter€1.Ð ˆ,Ø'0 ÐMelanesian€sea„faring€peoples€ò òhave€toó ó€know€their€way€around€theÐ \-¬(1 ÐSouth€Pacific.€€To€that€end,€they€study€and€map€the€stars,Ð ° Ðidentify€naval€passages,€keep€track€of€distance,€predict€theÐ „Ô Ðweather.€All€"this€massive€amount€of€discrete€information€...€hasÐ X¨ Ðto€be€committed€to€memory€...€[and]€is€organized€in€a€systematicÐ ,| Ðway"€[39]€using€empirical€observation€and€verification€as€well€asÐ P Ðabstract€thinking,€all€of€which€in€turn€are€transmitted€from€oneÐ Ô$ Ðgeneration€to€another.€"It€represents€ingenuities€of€much€theÐ ¨ ø Ðsame€kind€that€are€exemplified€in€the€products€of€WesternÐ | Ì Ðthought"€[41].Ð P   ÐÌThe€same€can€be€said€about€'traditional'€science€and€technologyÐ ø H  Ðelsewhere.€The€use€of€herbal€medicine€is€illustrated€in€chapter€2Ð Ì   Ðfrom€among€the€highland€Maya€in€Mexico.€It€involves€diagnosis€ofÐ  ð  Ðdifferent€Ô_ÔgastroÔ_Ô„intestinal€and€other€diseases,€experimentalÐ tÄ  Ðtreatment€with€herbal€remedies,€and€their€controlled€andÐ H˜  Ðsystematic€classification,€preparation,€storage,€andÐ l  Ðadministration.€The€latter€is€highly€successful,€and€chemicalÐ ð@  Ðanalysis€of€the€remedies€used€shows€that€many€of€them€haveÐ Ä Ðantibiotic€properties.€Of€course,€the€same€observations€apply€toÐ ˜è ÐChinese,€Indian€and€other€medicine.€Not€for€nothing€did€theÐ l¼ Ðpractice€and€science€of€immunology€originate€in€India,€andÐ @ Ðenvironmental€science€and€ecological€praxis€are€highly€developedÐ d Ðfor€instance€among€the€James€Bay€Indians€in€Canada€[chapter€3]Ð è8 Ðand€the€Arctic€Ô_ÔInuitsÔ_Ô€[chapter€12],€let€alone€Atlantic€fishermenÐ ¼  Ð[chapter€11].€Ð à ÐÌPrimatology€was€developed€in€Japan,€first€studying€indigenousÐ 8ˆ Ðprimates,€at€the€same€time€as€in€the€West€„„€but€€independentlyÐ  \ Ðand€with€significantly€different€Ô_ÔepistomologiesÔ_Ô€and€methods.Ð à0 ÐPamela€Asquith€shows€in€chapter€14€how€"these€theoretical,Ð ´ Ðcultural,€and€methodological€differences€gave€rise"€to€differentÐ ˆØ Ðhypotheses€and€findings,€which€for€the€same€reason€were€longÐ \¬ Ðignored€by€Western€Ô_ÔprimatologistsÔ_Ô€even€after€their€publication€inÐ 0€  ÐEnglish.€Indeed,€Western€Ô_ÔprimatologistsÔ_Ô€did€not€draw€on€researchÐ  T! Ðand€findings€from€Japan€until€some€of€them€sought€ammunition€forÐ Ø (" Ðtheir€own€innovative€critiques€of€received€primatology.€€Yet€at€aÐ ¬!ü# Ðrecent€international€Ô_ÔprimatolgyÔ_Ô€research€conference,€WesternÐ €"Ð$ Ðresearchers€reported€admitted€that€their€belated€adoption€of€someÐ T#¤% ÐJapanese€research€techniques€obliged€them€finally€to€abandon€someÐ ($x& Ðlong„held€dogmas€of€their€own€primatology.Ð ü$L ' ÐÌIn€the€also€innovative€chapter€4,€Jean€Love€observes€the€use€ofÐ ¤&ô!) Ðgrass„roots€mathematics€and€scientific€reasoning€andÐ x'È"* Ðexperimentation€also€among€"people€engaged€in€daily€activities€inÐ L(œ#+ Ðsupermarkets€and€kitchens€„„€as€they€shopped€for€groceries,Ð  )p$, Ðcooked€meals,€deal€with€quantitative€relations€€while€learningÐ ô)D%- Ðthe€Weight€Watchers€dieting€program,€and€managed€their€householdÐ È*&. Ðfinances"€[87].€She€argues€that€the€'every€day€problem€solving'Ð œ+ì&/ Ðof€'just€plain€folks'€is€not€qualitatively€different€from€orÐ p,À'0 Ðinferior€to€'scientific'€laboratory€practice,€however€much€folksÐ D-”(1 Ðmay€have€been€otherwise€persuaded€and€scientists€deluded€by€theÐ ° Ð'culture'€of€science.€This€corroborates€the€theme€of€the€book,Ð „Ô Ðalready€examined€from€above€in€parts€I€and€II,€also€from€Ô_ÔelowÔ_Ô€atÐ X¨ Ða€worms„eye€grass„roots€level.Ð ,| ÐÌÌIV.€SCIENCE€IN€HISTORY€AND€ALL€THATÐ ¨ ø ÐÌIf€science€is€not€so€uniquely€exceptional€in€its€alleged€autonomyÐ P   Ðand€rationality€nor€so€exceptionally€unique€in€the€West€evenÐ $ t  Ðtoday,€then€maybe€it€never€was.€For€the€millennial€long€periodÐ ø H  Ðbefore€1500,€the€main€locus€of€science€and€technology€was€inÐ Ì   ÐAsia.€The€multi„volume€òòHistory€of€Technologyò òóó€ó óedited€by€CharlesÐ  ð  ÐSinger€et€al€(1957)€recognizes€and€even€stresses€in€its€Volume€IIÐ €Ð  Ðthat€from€500€to€1500€AD€"technologically,€the€west€had€little€toÐ T¤  Ðbring€to€the€east.€The€technological€movement€was€in€the€otherÐ (x  Ðdirection"€(ibid.€756).€€It€reproduces€a€table€from€NeedhamÐ üL  Ð(1954)€that€traces€time„lags€25€centuries€for€the€iron€ploughÐ Ð  Ðmold€board,€15€to€10€centuries€for€some€and€6€to€3€centuries€forÐ ¤ô Ðothers€of€€several€dozen€inventions€and€discoveries€in€China€andÐ xÈ Ðtheir€first€adoption€in€Europe.€Nonetheless,€even€these€accountsÐ Lœ Ðare€excessively€European„focused.€For€during€these€centuries€Ð  p Ðtechnological€diffusion€was€primarily€back€and€forth€among€East,Ð ôD ÐSoutheast,€South,€and€West€Asia,€and€especially€between€China€andÐ È ÐPersia.€Before€any€of€this€technology€reached€Europe€at€all,€mostÐ œì Ðof€it€had€to€pass€via€the€Muslim€lands,€including€especiallyÐ pÀ ÐMuslim€Spain€and€also€use€the€Byzantines€and€later€the€Ô_ÔMongolsÔ_Ô€asÐ D” Ðtransmission€belts.Ð h ÐÌYet€the€received€Eurocentric€wisdom€about€science€and€technologyÐ À Ðand€their€institutional€forms€has€it€that€the€European€ones€haveÐ ”ä Ðbeen€superior€to€those€of€Asia€since€1500.€What€could€haveÐ h¸ Ðproduced€such€a€sudden€change?€„€if€it€happened€at€all!€An€oftÐ <Œ  Ðcited€student€of€the€subject,€Ô_ÔBernalÔ_Ô€(1969:II,312)€writes€thatÐ  `! Ð"this€early€technical€advance€in€China,€and€to€a€lesser€extent€inÐ ä 4" ÐIndia€and€the€Islamic€countries,€after€a€promising€start€came€toÐ ¸!# Ða€dead€stop€before€the€fifteenth€century,€and€...€resulted€in€...Ð Œ"Ü$ Ða€high€but€static€technical€level."€€Accordingly€also,€AsiaÐ `#°% Ðdisappears€from€Ô_ÔBernalÔ_Ô's€account€in€Ô_ÔVol.IIÔ_Ô.€We€will€observe€belowÐ 4$„& Ðthat€the€real€world€evidence€is€otherwise.€Nonetheless,€Ô_ÔBernalÔ_ÔÐ %X ' Ðattributes€the€subsequent€rise€of€science€and€technology€to€theÐ Ü%,!( Ðindigenous€rise€of€capitalism€in€the€West,€for€which€in€turn€heÐ °&") Ðaccounts€in€the€same€terms€as€Marx€and€Weber.€Robert€Merton's€nowÐ „'Ô"* Ðclassic€1938€discourse€on€"Science,€Technology,€and€Society"€isÐ X(¨#+ Ðentirely€Ô_ÔWeberianÔ_Ô€and€even€linked€to€the€latter's€thesis€aboutÐ ,)|$, Ðthe€"Protestant€Ethic€and€the€Spirit€of€Capitalism."Ð *P%- ÐÌSinger's€Volume€III€for€the€period€1500„1750€is€explicitlyÐ ¨+ø&/ Ðdevoted€to€ò ò€The€West.ó ó€Without€any€further€comparisons,€itÐ |,Ì'0 Ðnonetheless€asserts€that€"it€is€certain,€however"€that€theÐ \-¬(1 Ðbalance€shifted€already€in€1500,€so€that€"granted€the€immenseÐ ° ÐEuropean€naval€and€military€superiority,€European€control€of€theÐ „Ô ÐFar€East€was€an€almost€inevitable€consequence"€(ibid.Ð X¨ ÐIII,709,710).€Moreover,€Singer€et€al€(1957,€II,€711)€claim€aÐ ,| Ð"generally€higher€level€of€technical€proficiency€in€Europe€in€theÐ P Ðseventeenth€century€compared€with€the€rest€of€the€globe"€and€theyÐ Ô$ Ðattribute€the€same€to€a€European€and€especially€British€moreÐ ¨ ø Ð"liberal€social€system,"€being€"united€in€religion"€and€otherÐ | Ì Ðsuch€differences€in€"civilization"€(ibid.€716).€Ð P   ÐÌFor€other€authors€from€Marx€to€Weber€and€all€their€many€disciplesÐ ø H  Ðalso€€the€rise€of€Europe€was€also€a€"miracle"€€was€due€to€theÐ Ì   Ðallegedly€unique€qualities€that€€Europeans€had€and€all€othersÐ  ð  Ðlacked.€Only€later,€it€is€claimed,€were€science€and€technologyÐ tÄ  Ðthen€diffused€outward€over€the€rest€of€the€world€as€theÐ H˜  Ð"civilizing€mission"€of€"the€white€man's€burden."€€Ð l  ÐÌThis€myth€has€been€well€examined€by€J.€M.€Blaut€(1993a)€under€theÐ Ä Ðapt€title€òòThe€Colonizer's€Model€of€the€World:€GeographicalÐ ˜è ÐÔ_ÔDiffusionismÔ_Ô€and€Eurocentric€Historyóó.€Blaut€microscopicallyÐ l¼ Ðexamines,€exposes€and€demolishes€the€myth€of€"The€EuropeanÐ @ ÐMiracle"€in€its€myriad€forms€of€biology€[racial€superiority€andÐ d Ðdemographic€continence];€environment€[nasty„tropical€Africa;Ð è8 Ðarid,€despotic€Asia;€temperate€Europe];€exceptional€rationalityÐ ¼  Ðand€freedom€[as€against€"Oriental€despotism",€the€centerpiece€ofÐ à Ðthe€Ô_ÔWeberianÔ_Ô€doctrine,€and€part€of€the€Ô_ÔMarxianÔ_Ô€one];€allegedÐ d´ ÐEuropean€historical€superiority€in€technology,€despite€itsÐ 8ˆ ÐÔ_ÔborrowingsÔ_Ô€from€and€dependence€on€earlier€Chinese,€Indian€andÐ  \ ÐIslamic€advances;€and€society€[development€of€the€state,Ð à0 Ðsignificance€of€the€Church€and€"the€Protestant€ethic,"€the€roleÐ ´ Ðof€the€bourgeoisie€in€class€formation,€the€nuclear€family,€etc].€Ð ˆØ ÐThe€same€and€especially€the€Ô_ÔWeberianÔ_Ô€allegations€of€'specific€andÐ \¬ Ðpeculiar€achievements€of€Western€rationalism'€have€more€recentlyÐ 0€  Ðbeen€disputed€also€by€the€anthropologist€Jack€Goody€(1996),€whoÐ  T! Ðsurveys€analogous€ones€in€West,€South,€and€East€Asia.€TheirÐ Ø (" Ðexamination€of€all€these€Eurocentric€assumptions€against€theÐ ¬!ü# Ðcanons€of€scientific€evidence€and€elementary€logic€literallyÐ €"Ð$ Ðdemolishes€each€and€every€one€of€them.Ð T#¤% ÐÌIndeed,€the€Ô_ÔIslamicistÔ_Ô€and€world€historian€Marshall€Ô_ÔHodgsonÔ_Ô€wroteÐ ü$L ' Ðbefore€his€untimely€death€in€1968€thatÐ Ð% !( ÐÌà0 ½ àall€attempts€that€I€have€yet€seen€to€invoke€pre„ModernÐ x'È"* Ðseminal€traits€in€the€Occident€can€be€shown€to€fail€underÐ L(œ#+ Ðclose€historical€analysis,€once€other€societies€begin€to€beÐ  )p$, Ðknown€as€intimately€as€the€Occident.€This€also€applies€toÐ ô)D%- Ðthe€great€master,€Max€Weber,€who€tried€to€show€that€theÐ È*&. ÐOccident€inherited€a€unique€combination€of€rationality€andÐ œ+ì&/ Ðactivism€(Ô_ÔHodgsonÔ_Ô€1993:86).Ðp,À'0½(#½(# ÐÐ D-”(1 ÐThree€decades€later€another€critic,€Frank€Ô_ÔPerlinÔ_Ô,€observes€andÐ ° Ðthen€asks:Ð „Ô ÐÌà0 ½ àThe€creation€of€the€'scientific€fact'€frequently,€and€evenÐ ,| Ðsystematically,€turns€out€to€have€been€its€opposite,€theÐ P Ðestablishment€of€myth,€marking€'our'€general€complicity€inÐ Ô$ Ðthe€very€facts€beyond€science€that€'we'€'scientists'Ð ¨ ø Ð'intellectuals'€alike€(justly)€abhor....€€How€can€it€be€thatÐ | Ì Ðthe€sciences€of€society€have€permitted€so€little€of€contraryÐ P   Ðsubstance€to€be€said€to€the€peddlers€of€myth?€(òòóóÔ_ÔPerlinÔ_ÔÐ $ t  Ð1994:xi,15).Ðø H ½(#½(# ÐÌThe€more€we€look€at€science€and€technology€as€economic€and€socialÐ  ð  Ðactivities€not€only€in€Europe€but€world„wide,€the€less€historicalÐ tÄ  Ðsupport€is€there€for€the€Eurocentric€argument€about€the€allegedÐ H˜  Ðrole€of€the€"[European!]€scientific€revolution"€€in€theÐ l  Ðseventeenth€or€any€other€century€in€the€development€of€technologyÐ ð@  Ðin€the€West€prior€to€1870.€As€already€observed€in€Part€II€above,Ð Ä Ðit€had€NONE.Ð ˜è ÐÌAnd€did€science€and€technology€continue€to€develop,€be€thatÐ @ Ðindependently€or€together,€after€1500€elsewhere€as€well?€On€theÐ d Ðevidence,€the€answer€is€a€resounding€YES!€For€China,€JosephÐ è8 ÐNeedham's€(1954„„)€monumental€multi„volume€òòScience€andÐ ¼  ÐCivilization€in€Chinaóó€is€well€known,€although€perhapsÐ à Ðinsufficiently€examined.€because€of€its€large€bulk€and€detail.€AÐ d´ Ðfour€volume€extract€has€been€prepared€by€Ô_ÔRonanÔ_Ô€(1986),€andÐ 8ˆ ÐNeedham€(1964)€himself€summarizes€"Science€and€China's€InfluenceÐ  \ Ðon€the€World."Ð à0 ÐÌNeedham€insists€that€scientific€investigation€was€well€acceptedÐ ˆØ Ðand€supported€in€China€and€that€technological€innovation€and€itsÐ \¬ Ðapplication€continued€through€the€early€modern€period,€also€inÐ 0€  Ðfields€like€astronomy€and€cosmology,€and€in€medical€fields€likeÐ  T! Ðanatomy,€immunology,€and€pharmacology.€Needham€explicitly€deniesÐ Ø (" Ðthe€European€notion€that€the€Chinese€only€invented€things€but€didÐ ¬!ü# Ðnot€wish€to€or€know€how€to€apply€them€in€practice.€€Although€heÐ €"Ð$ Ðexamines€some€apparently€parallel€developments€in€East€and€West,Ð T#¤% Ðhe€also€speculates€on€the€possible€channels€and€extent€of€theirÐ ($x& Ðmutual€influence€and€interchange.Ð ü$L ' ÐÌThere€are€also€similar€studies€and€findings€for€India,€albeit€onÐ ¤&ô!) Ða€lesser€scale€than€Needham's€monumental€work.€For€instance,€Ð x'È"* ÐÔ_ÔKuppuramÔ_Ô€and€Ô_ÔKumudamaniÔ_Ô€(1990)€have€published€a€òòHistory€ofÐ L(œ#+ ÐScience€and€Technology€in€Indiaóó€in€12€volumes,€and€Ô_ÔRhamanÔ_Ô€hasÐ  )p$, Ðedited€another€collection€on€the€same€in€"HistoricalÐ ô)D%- ÐPerspective."€They€testify€to€their€continued€development€notÐ È*&. Ðonly€before€1500€but€also€still€since€then.€€Ô_ÔDharampalÔ_Ô€(1971)Ð œ+ì&/ Ðcollected€a€compendium€of€contemporary€eighteenth€centuryÐ p,À'0 Ðaccounts€by€Europeans,€who€also€testify€to€their€interest€in€andÐ D-”(1 Ðprofit€from€Indian€science€and€technology€still€then.€IndianÐ ° Ðmathematics€and€astronomy€were€sufficiently€advanced€forÐ „Ô ÐEuropeans€still€to€import€astronomical€tables€and€related€worksÐ X¨ Ðfrom€India€in€the€seventeenth€and€eighteenth€centuries.€InÐ ,| Ðmedicine,€the€theory€and€practice€of€inoculation€against€smallpoxÐ P Ðcame€from€there.€Ð Ô$ ÐÌSimilarly,€Ô_ÔNasrÔ_Ô€(1976)€and€al„Hassan€and€Hill€(1986)€have€writtenÐ | Ì Ðand€edited€compendia€testifying€to€the€development€and€diffusionÐ P   Ðof€Islamic€science€and€technology€ranging€from€earliest€to€recentÐ $ t  Ðtimes.€€George€Ô_ÔSalibaÔ_Ô€(1996)€provides€multiple€examples€ofÐ ø H  Ðimportant€scientific€"Arab€Influences€on€the€Renaissance,"€notÐ Ì   Ðonly€before€and€during€this€period€but€still€in€the€seventeenthÐ  ð  Ðcentury.€Only€one€example€is€that€Ô_ÔSalibaÔ_Ô€offers€evidence€ofÐ tÄ  Ðseveral€kinds€that€Arab€theories€were€known€to,€and€thatÐ H˜  Ðdocumentary€knowledge€about€the€same€were€transmitted€to,Ð l  ÐCopernicus,€which€made€crucial€inputs€into€his€"revolution"€whileÐ ð@  Ðhe€was€still€working€on€it.Ð Ä ÐÌSo€it€is€not€enough€to€just€go€on€touting€Western€science€or€itsÐ l¼ Ðalleged€seventeenth€century€revolution€in€Europe.€We€betterÐ @ Ðexamine€the€evidence€of€Asian€capacities€with€a€bit€more€care,€asÐ d ÐGoody€(1996)€and€Blaut€(1997)€begin€to€do.€Upon€any€inspection,Ð è8 Ðnot€only€will€we€find€that€technology€was€far€"advanced"€in€manyÐ ¼  Ðparts€of€Asia,€but€it€continued€to€develop€in€the€centuries€afterÐ à Ð1500.€€Needham€explicitly€challenges€others's€dismissal€of€theÐ d´ Ðsame,€also€for€the€early€modern€period.€"In€technologicalÐ 8ˆ Ðinfluence€before€and€during€the€Renaissance€China€occupies€aÐ  \ Ðquite€dominating€position....€The€world€owes€far€more€to€theÐ à0 Ðresilient€craftsmen€of€ancient€and€medieval€China€than€toÐ ´ ÐAlexandrian€mechanics,€articulate€theoreticians€though€they€were"Ð ˆØ Ð(Needham€1964:238).€€Needham€lists€not€only€the€well€knownÐ \¬ Ðgunpowder,€paper€and€printing,€and€compass.€He€also€examines€co„Ð 0€  Ðfusion€and€oxygenation€iron€and€steel€technology,€mechanicalÐ  T! Ðclocks,€and€engineering€devices€such€as€drive„belts€and€chain„Ð Ø (" Ðdrive€methods€of€converting€rotary€to€rectilinear€motion,Ð ¬!ü# Ðsegmental€arch€and€iron„chain€suspension€bridges,€deep„drillingÐ €"Ð$ Ðequipment,€and€paddle„wheel€boats,€fore„and€aft€sails,€watertightÐ T#¤% Ðcompartments€and€stern„post€rudders€in€navigation,€and€manyÐ ($x& Ðothers.€Ð ü$L ' ÐÌContinued€scientific€and€technological€development€alsoÐ ¤&ô!) Ðcharacterized€especially€the€globally€most€competitive€military€Ð x'È"* Ðnaval,€and€textile€technologies€and€industries€elsewhere,Ð L(œ#+ Ðparticularly€in€India,€Persia,€and€the€Ottoman€Empire.€€TheÐ  )p$, Ðalleged€"Ottoman€decline"€is€contradicted€already€by€theÐ ô)D%- Ðcomparative€examination€of€technologies€in€precisely€the€firstÐ È*&. Ðtwo€areas€(Grant€1996).€However€is€was€also€the€case€in€moreÐ œ+ì&/ Ð"local"€hydraulic€and€other€public€works,€iron€working€and€otherÐ p,À'0 Ðmetallurgy€including€armaments€and€especially€steel€making,€paperÐ D-”(1 Ðand€printing,€and€of€course€in€other€export€industries€likeÐ ° Ðceramics,€textiles,€etc.€Ð „Ô ÐÌIn€short,€it€is€far€from€established,€as€is€so€often€supposed,Ð ,| Ðthat€European€"technological€superiority"€was€established€fromÐ P Ð1500€onwards.€€òòóóMy€own€comparative€examination€of€the€developmentÐ Ô$ Ðand€use€of€science€and€technology€in€the€world€before€1800Ð ¨ ø Ðfocuses€primarily€on€each€of€the€gun,€ship,€textile,€printing,Ð | Ì Ðmetallurgic,€and€transport€industries.€In€each€of€these,€variousÐ P   Ðparts€of€Asia€held€their€own€and€often€prevailed€over€theÐ $ t  ÐEuropeans€until€at€least€1750.€Even€€after€that€the€British€andÐ ø H  ÐDutch€still€continued€to€buy€and€even€commission€better,€longerÐ Ì   Ðlasting,€and€cheaper€Asian€built€ships.€India€dominated€the€worldÐ  ð  Ðcotton€textile€market€with€its€technology€and€exports€until€1816.Ð tÄ  ÐBritish€laboratories€found€Indian€steel€to€be€better€and€cheaperÐ H˜  Ðthan€their€own€and€even€than€that€of€Sweden.€€China€was€andÐ l  Ðremained€the€world's€most€productive€and€competitive€economy€andÐ ð@  Ðthereby€was€able€to€absorb€half€of€the€world's€production€ofÐ Ä Ðsilver,€which€it€used€to€finance€its€own€development€of€science,€Ð ˜è Ðtechnology,€industry,€agriculture,€transport€and€commerce€untilÐ l¼ Ðat€least€1800,€when€the€Chinese€standard€of€living€and€per€capitaÐ @ Ðnational€income€still€exceeded€that€of€the€West€(Frank€1998).Ð d ÐÌCONCLUSIONÐ ¼  ÐÌòòóóIndeed,€there€was€ò òno€Europeanó ó€technology€or€scientificÐ d´ Ðrationality.€Their€invention€and€diffusion€was€world€wide€fromÐ D” Ðthe€word€GO,€which€also€was€not€uttered€in€Europe€or€the€West.€InÐ h Ðthe€world„wide€division€of€labor€in€a€competitive€world€economy,Ð ì< Ðlong„standing€national,€regional,€or€sectoral€technologicalÐ À Ðsuperiority€could€not€be€maintained€as€long€as€at€least€someÐ ”ä Ðother€real€or€potential€competitors€had€sufficient€interest€andÐ h¸ Ðcapacity€to€acquire€such€technology€as€well.€That€is,Ð <Œ  Ðtechnological,€like€and€as€part€of€all€economic,€development€wasÐ  `! Ða€world€economic,€social,€and€cultural€process,€which€took€placeÐ ä 4" Ðin€and€because€of€the€structure€of€the€world€economy/systemÐ ¸!# Ðitself.€It€is€true€that€this€world€economy/system€was€and€stillÐ Œ"Ü$ Ðis€structurally€unequal€and€temporally€uneven.€However,€it€is€ò ònotÐ `#°% Ðtrueó ó€that€scientific€and€technological€or€any€other€"development"Ð @$& Ðwas€essentially€locally,€regionally,€nationally,€or€culturallyÐ  %p ' Ðdetermined;€nor€that€any€one€place€or€people€had€any€essentialÐ ô%D!( Ð"monopoly"€or€even€"superiority"€within€this€world€economy€andÐ È&") Ðsystem.€Still€less€was€or€is€it€the€case,€as€we€shall€observeÐ œ'ì"* Ðbelow,€that€any€such€alleged€"superiority"€was€based€onÐ p(À#+ Ð"exceptional"€institutions,€culture,€"civilization"€or€"race!"€IÐ D)”$, Ðconclude€as€Nader€[274]€does:€"The€scientific€attitude,€whichÐ *h%- Ðboth€pursues€and€criticizes€the€production€of€knowledge,€is€notÐ ì*<&. Ðconfined€to€scientists;€it€may€even€be€an€attitude€shared€withÐ À+'/ Ðnon€scientists."€And€perhaps€also€the€other€way€around,€if€FullerÐ ”,ä'0 Ðis€right:€"Indeed,€what€scientists€often€see€as€the€public'sÐ h-¸(1 Ð'confusion'€about€the€nature€of€science€may€simply€be€theÐ ° Ðpublic's€recognition€that€there€is€no€'nature'€to€science"Ð „Ô Ð(Fuller€1997:62).€In€that€case,€perhaps€there€is€still€room€forÐ X¨ Ðhope,€if€not€faith.Ð ,| ЀÌSo€Kipling's€famous€phrase€that€'the€East€is€East,€and€the€WestÐ Ô$ Ðis€West,€and€never€the€twain€shall€meet'€was€fully€as€muchÐ ¨ ø ÐWestern€colonialist€mythology€then€as€the€still€widespreadÐ | Ì Ðmythology€about€Western€science€still€is€now.€òòNaked€Scienceóó€doesÐ P   Ðindeed€speak€truth€to€power,€also€about€the€political€use€ofÐ 0 €  Ðscience€to€maintain€power;€and€as€such€its€political€radicalismÐ  T  Ðand€objectivity€are€a€welcome€and€alas€still€needed€contributionÐ Ø (  Ðto€the€demonstration€of€this€fact€of€life€in€our€one€world.€WhatÐ ¬ü  Ðwe€need€to€preserve€and€advance€both€in€scientific€theory€andÐ €Ð  Ðpopular€practice€is€not€any€warmed€over€re„cycling€of€the€'clashÐ T¤  Ðof€civilizations'€by€that€old€cold€warrior€Huntington,€butÐ (x  Ðinstead€theory€and€praxis€that€most€contributed€to€ending€thatÐ üL  Ðwar,€Gorbachev's€'unity€in€diversity.'Ð Ð  ÐÔ€¼ìûXXB¶ÔÌÌREFERENCES€CITEDÐ tÄ ÐÌAdams,€Robert€Ô_ÔMcCÔ_Ô.€1996.€òòPaths€of€Fire:€An€à - àÐ D” ÐAnthropologist's€Inquiry€into€Western€Technologyóó,€à … àÐ ,| ÐPrinceton:€Princeton€University€Press.€Ð d ÐÌAmin,€Samir€òòóó1991.€"The€Ancient€World„Systems€versus€the€Ð ä4 Ðà ½ àModern€World„System"€òòReviewóó€XIV,€3,€Summer:€349„à Ý" àÐ Ì Ð385.Ð ´ ÐÌ„„„„„€1993.€"The€Ancient€World„Systems€versus€the€à … àÐ „Ô ÐModern€Capitalist€World„System"€in€A.G.€Frank€and€à … àÐ l¼ ÐBarry€K.€Gills,€Ô_ÔEdsÔ_Ô.€òòThe€World€System:€Five€Hundred€à Ý" àÐ T ¤  ÐYears€or€Five€Thousand?óó€London€and€New€York:€à - àÐ