Are Animals Just Noisy Machines?: Louis Boutan and the Co-invention of Animal and Child Psychology in the French Third Republic

Historians of science have only just begun to sample the wealth of different approaches to the study of animal behavior undertaken in the twentieth century. To date, more attention has been given to Lorenzian ethology and American behaviorism than to other work and traditions, but different approaches are equally worthy of the historian’s attention, reflecting not only the broader range of questions that could be asked about animal behavior and the “animal mind” but also the different contexts in which these questions were important. One such approach is that represented by the work of the French zoologist Louis Boutan (1859–1934). This paper explores the intellectual and cultural history of Boutan’s work on animal language and the animal mind, and contextualizes the place of animal behavior studies within late-nineteenth-and early-twentieth-century French biology. I explore the ways in which Boutan addressed the philosophical issue of whether language was necessary for abstract thought and show how he shifted from the idea that animals were endowed with a purely affective language to the notion that of they were capable of “rudimentary” reasoning. I argue that the scientific and broader socio-cultural contexts in which Boutan operated played a role in this transition. Then I show how Boutan’s linguistic and psychological experiments with a gibbon and children provide insights into his conception of “naturalness.” Although Boutan reared his gibbon at home and studied it in the controlled environment of his laboratory, he continued to identify its behavior as “natural.” I specifically demonstrate the importance of the milieu of the French Third Republic in shaping Boutan’s understanding not only of animal intelligence and child education, but also his definition of nature. Finally, I argue that Boutan’s studies on the primate mind provide us with a lens through which we can examine the co-invention of animal and child psychology in early-twentieth-century France.     

H. G. Bronn and the History of Nature

The German paleontologist H. G. Bronn is best remembered for his 1860 translation and critique of Darwin’s Origin of Species, and for supposedly twisting Darwinian evolution into conformity with German idealistic morphology. This analysis of Bronn’s writings shows, however, that far from being mired in an outmoded idealism that confined organic change to predetermined developmental pathways, Bronn had worked throughout the 1840s and 1850s on a new, historical approach to life. He had been moving from the study of plant and animal forms in the abstract towards placing them into geological and biogeographical context, analyzing patterns of progress and adaptation, explaining species diversity and individual variation, and applying biological insights to practical problems such as artificial breeding. Even though Bronn never fully accepted the idea of species transformation, he saw Darwin’s theory as a bold new move toward his own goal of establishing a comprehensive, historical science of life, and he presented it as such in his translation and commentary. Thus Darwin’s ideas gained a quick and generally favorable hearing in Germany not because of their easy assimilability into an older tradition, but because of their appeal to the innovative Bronn.     

William Bateson, human genetics and medicine

The importance of human genetics in the work of William Bateson (1861–1926) and in his promotion of Mendelism in the decade following the 1900 rediscovery of Mendel’s work is described. Bateson had close contacts with clinicians interested in inherited disorders, notably Archibald Garrod, to whom he suggested the recessive inheritance of alkaptonuria, and the ophthalmologist Edward Nettleship, and he lectured extensively to medical groups. Bateson’s views on human inheritance were far sighted and cautious. Not only should he be regarded as one of the founders of human genetics, but human genetics itself should be seen as a key element of the foundations of mendelian inheritance, not simply a later development from knowledge gained by study of other species.     

Flora was His Interest and Prime Course of Study: A Botanical Career for W.E. Ricker Disappears

Synopsis Bill Ricker’s career went through many twists in his academic years. He had taken botany in his senior matriculation year at high school and he had collected over 100 species of flora before commencement of university life. At the conclusion of his first university year, he set out over the summer to collect a much larger sample of species, primarily from the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence ecoregion, to fulfil a requirement for a second year botany course (spermatophytes). He identified about 390 species, and some 254 were collected and pooled with those from previous years to make a final submission of 354 spermatophyte species. Field plant identification continued in each academic year thereafter, in concert with collections and identifications of aquatic invertebrates in his summer projects while under the employment of the Ontario Fisheries Research Laboratory. At the conclusion of his undergraduate years, Bill had taken more courses in botany than in zoology, and it was the summer employment that had really prepared him for postgraduate work in fisheries biology, which was ecologically oriented. When Bill left Ontario in the autumn of 1931 he had identified over 600 species of plants, excluding lower cryptogams, but including many aquatic species of higher plants. In western North America Bill’s botanical career began at Cultus Lake in 1931. He again studied all aspects of the basin while employed with the federal government, and from the work he assembled a Ph.D. thesis. At the time of thesis completion he had identified over 300 species of flora, including alpine plants at timberline, 1500 – 1800 m above lake level, and planktonic algae in its water column. In 1939, after more field fisheries work in the Fraser River basin of British Columbia, Bill accepted a position with the biological staff at Indiana University. In this period which concluded in 1950 he identified another 50 – 110 species of flora, all in the Carolinian ecoregion, and hitherto not seen by him. Considering all floral classes, Bill’s eastern North American repertoire had by then added up to 791 species, representative of more than 112 families of plants. Returning west for the remainder of his life, new identifications elsewhere added to his Cultus Lake list which slowly added up to about 1000 species for the west coastal region of North America. Flora was also identified elsewhere in the mid-continental region of North America, in Eurasia where the Abisko region of Lappland was a highlight, and in South America and New Zealand. Records of his botanical prowess, were kept primarily in his diaries, which began in 1923 and were maintained consistently to the end of 1934, and thereafter intermittently to 1949. The diaries reveal that his career as a budding botanist was subtly hijacked by a wily Professor W.H.K. Harkness in the rival Biology Department who out-manoeuvred Drs. R.B. Thompson and R.A. Sifton in the Botany Department. The former always managed to employ Bill in summer and keep him occupied in the department’s labs during the autumn and winter and spring, tying up any free time when the botanist had approached him on lab work. Certainly, the botany courses taken and which he excelled at were more appropriate for his aquatic ecological pursuits. Salesmanship won the day for the zoologists, but Bill was a life-long botanist regardless of whatever else he studied or managed throughout his professional career. The last days of his life had a botanical conclusion.     

Last judgment: the visionary biology of J.B.S. Haldane

This paper seeks to reinterpret the life and work of J. B. S. Haldane by focusing on an illuminating but largely ignored essay he published in1927, “The Last Judgment” – the sequel to his better known work, Daedalus (1924). This astonishing essay expresses a vision of the human future over the next 40,000,000 years, one that revises and updates Wellsian futurism with the long range implications of the “new biology” for human destiny. That vision served as a kind of lifelong credo, one that infused and informed his diverse scientific work, political activities, and popular writing, and that gave unity and coherence to his remarkable career. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Plant-pollinator interactions: from specialization to generalization * Waser NM, Ollerton J. eds. 2006. * Chicago: Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. $45 (paperback). 488 pp.

Highly specializedpollination systems, such as figs and their wasp or orchidsthat deceive bees in trying to make them mate with their floralorgans, are intuitively appealing to most people and have, therefore,gained far more attention both in popular and scientific literaturethan the more generalized pollination systems. For a long timethe dominant view was that many, or perhaps even most, plant–pollinatorinteractions were specialized. In 1996 Waser and his colleaguestried to stir things up by writing an article in which theyargued that, in contrast to common belief, generalization waswidespread in plant–pollinator systems. Ten     

Wallace’s Other Line: Human Biogeography and Field Practice in the Eastern Colonial Tropics

This paper examines how the 19th-century British naturalist Alfred Russel Wallace used biogeographical mapping practices to draw a boundary line between Malay and Papuan groups in the colonial East Indies in the 1850s. Instead of looking for a continuous gradient of variation between Malays and Papuans, Wallace chose to look for a sharp discontinuity between them. While Wallace’s “human biogeography” paralleled his similar project to map plant and animal distributions in the same region, he invoked distinctive “mental and moral” features as more decisive than physical ones. By following Wallace in the field, we can see his field mapping practices in action – how he conquered the problem of local particularity in the case of human variation. His experiences on the periphery of expanding European empires, far from metropolitan centers, shaped Wallace’s observations in the field. Taking his cues from colonial racial categories and his experiences collaborating with local people in the field, Wallace constructed the boundary line between the Malay and Papuan races during several years of work in the field criss-crossing the archipelago as a scientific collector. This effort to map a boundary line in the field was a bold example of using the practices of survey science to raise the status of field work by combining fact gathering with higher-level generalizing, although the response back in the metropole was less than enthusiastic. Upon his return to Britain in the 1860s, Wallace found that appreciation for observational facts he had gathered in the field was not accompanied by agreement with his theoretical interpretations and methods for doing human biogeography.     

Scientific research at the Laboratoire Arago (Banyuls, France) in the twentieth Century: Edouard Chatton, the "master", and André Lwoff, the "pupil"

Edouard Chatton (1883–1947) began his scientific career in the Pasteur Institute, where he made several important discoveries regarding pathogenic protists (trypanosomids, Plasmodium, toxoplasms, Leishmania). In 1908 he married a "Banyulencque", Marie Herre; from 1920, he focused his research on marine protists. He finished his career as Professor at the Sorbonne (Paris) and director of the Laboratoire Arago in Banyuls-sur-mer, where he died in 1947. André Lwoff (1902–1994) lived several scientific lives in addition to his artistic and family life. But it is the study of protists that filled his first life after he encountered the exceptional Master who was Chatton. Lwoff's father was a psychiatrist and his mother an artist sculptor. He became a Doctor of Medicine in 1927 and then a Doctor of Sciences in 1932, his thesis dealing with biochemical aspects of protozoa nutrition. He met Chatton in 1921 and – until Chatton's death – their meetings, first in Roscoff and then in Banyuls-sur-mer, were numerous and their collaboration very close. Their monograph on apostome ciliates was one of the peaks of this collaboration. In 1938, Lwoff was made director of the Microbial Physiology Department at the Pasteur Institute in Paris, where he began a new life devoted to bacteria, and then to viruses, before pursuing his career as director of the Cancer Research Institute in Villejuif (France). Lwoff was awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine in 1965. He died in Banyuls in 1994. "Master" and "pupil" had in common perseverance in their scientific work, conception and observation, a critical sense and rigor but also a great artistic sensibility that painting and drawing in the exceptional surroundings of Banyuls-sur-mer had fulfilled. Electronic Publication     

Improving Data Access for Computational Grid Applications

High-performance computing increasingly occurs on “computational grids” composed of heterogeneous and geographically distributed systems of computers, networks, and storage devices that collectively act as a single “virtual” computer. A key challenge in this environment is to provide efficient access to data distributed across remote data servers. Our parallel I/O framework, called Armada, allows application and data-set providers to flexibly compose graphs of processing modules that describe the distribution, application interfaces, and processing required of the dataset before computation. Although the framework provides a simple programming model for the application programmer and the data-set provider, the resulting graph may contain bottlenecks that prevent efficient data access. In this paper, we present an algorithm used to restructure Armada graphs that distributes computation and data flow to improve performance in the context of a wide-area computational grid. This work was supported by Sandia National Laboratories under DOE contract DOE-AV6184. Ron A. Oldfield is a senior member of the technical staff at Sandia National Laboratories in Albuquerque, NM. He received the B.Sc. in computer science from the University of New Mexico in 1993. From 1993 to 1997, he worked in the computational sciences department of Sandia National Laboratories, where he specialized in seismic research and parallel I/O. He was the primary developer for the GONII-SSD (Gas and Oil National Information Infrastructure–Synthetic Seismic Dataset) project and a co-developer for the R&D 100 award winning project “Salvo”, a project to develop a 3D finite-difference prestack-depth migration algorithm for massively parallel architectures. From 1997 to 2003 he attended graduate school at Dartmouth college and received his Ph.D. in June, 2003. In September of 2003, he returned to Sandia to work in the Scalable Computing Systems department. His research interests include parallel and distributed computing, parallel I/O, and mobile computing. David Kotz is a Professor of Computer Science at Dartmouth College in Hanover NH. After receiving his A.B. in Computer Science and Physics from Dartmouth in 1986, he completed his Ph.D in Computer Science from Duke University in 1991. He returned to Dartmouth to join the faculty in 1991, where he is now Professor of Computer Science, Director of the Center for Mobile Computing, and Executive Director of the Institute for Security Technology Studies. His research interests include context-aware mobile computing, pervasive computing, wireless networks, and intrusion detection. He is a member of the ACM, IEEE Computer Society, and USENIX associations, and of Computer Professionals for Social Responsibility. For more information see http://www.cs.dartmouth.edu/dfk/.     

Marvelling at the Marvel: The Supposed Conversion of A.D. Darbishire to Mendelism

The so-called “biometric-Mendelian controversy” has received much attention from science studies scholars. This paper focuses on one scientist involved in this debate, Arthur Dukinfield Darbishire, who performed a series of hybridization experiments with mice beginning in 1901. Previous historical work on Darbishire’s experiments and his later attempt to reconcile Mendelian and biometric views describe Darbishire as eventually being “converted”' to Mendelism. I provide a new analysis of this episode in the context of Darbishire’s experimental results, his underlying epistemology, and his influence on the broader debate surrounding the rediscovery and acceptance of Mendelism. Iinvestigate various historiographical issues raised by this episode in order to reflect on the idea of “conversion” to a scientific theory. Darbishire was an influential figure who resisted strong forces compelling him to convert prematurely due to his requirements that the new theory account for particularly important anomalous facts and answer the most pressing questions in the field. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Depicting the Tree of Life: the Philosophical and Historical Roots of Evolutionary Tree Diagrams

It is a popularly held view that Darwin was the first author to draw a phylogenetic tree diagram. However, as is the case with most popular beliefs, this one also does not hold true. Firstly, Darwin never called his diagram of common descent a tree. Secondly, even before Darwin, tree diagrams were used by a variety of philosophical, religious, and secular scholars to depict phenomena such as “logical relationships,” “affiliations,” “genealogical descent,” “affinity,” and “historical relatedness” between the elements portrayed on the tree. Moreover, historically, tree diagrams themselves can be grouped into a larger class of diagrams that were drawn to depict natural and/or divine order in the world. In this paper, we trace the historical roots and cultural meanings of these tree diagrams. It will be demonstrated that tree diagrams as we know them are the outgrowth of ancient philosophical attempts to find the “true order” of the world, and to map the world “as it is” (ontologically), according to its true essence. This philosophical idea would begin a fascinating journey throughout Western European history. It lies at the foundation of the famous “scala naturae,” as well as religious and secular genealogical thinking, especially in regard to divine, familial (kinship), and linguistic pedigrees that were often depicted by tree images. These scala naturae would fuse with genealogical, pedigree thinking, and the trees that were the result of this blend would, from the nineteenth century onward, also include the element of time. The recognition of time would eventually lead to the recognition of evolution as a fact of nature, and subsequently, tree iconographies would come to represent exclusively the evolutionary descent of species.     

Of Mice and Men: Evolution and the Socialist Utopia. William Morris,H.G. Wells,and George Bernard Shaw

During the British socialist revival of the 1880s competing theories of evolution were central to disagreements about strategy for social change. In News from Nowhere (1891), William Morris had portrayed socialism as the result of Lamarckian processes, and imagined a non-Malthusian future. H.G. Wells, an enthusiastic admirer of Morris in the early days of the movement, became disillusioned as a result of the Malthusianism he learnt from Huxley and his subsequent rejection of Lamarckism in light of Weismann’s experiments on mice. This brought him into conflict with his fellow Fabian, George Bernard Shaw, who rejected neo-Darwinism in favour of a Lamarckian conception of change he called “creative evolution.”     

Beyondism: Raymond B. Cattell and the new eugenics

A significant confusion has arisen out of the mass of work done on the history of eugenics in the last two decades. Early scholars of the subject treated eugenics as a marginalized or obsolete movement of the radical right. Subsequent research has shown that eugenic ideas were adopted in diverse national settings by very different groups, including – among others – liberals, communists and Catholics, as well as radical rightists. This complexity is sometimes taken to mean that eugenics has no special ideological associations, that it is historically and potentially a beast of a thousand heads. It is not. Although people of varied ideological commitments have been attracted to eugenics, ideologues of the radical right, and above all interwar fascists, have been uniquely and centrally involved in its development. Fascism and the radical right are also complex entities, but for all the heterogeneity of both eugenics and fascism, the special historical relationship between the two cannot be ignored. This relationship is exemplified in the work of the influential psychologist, Raymond B. Cattell. Cattell was an early supporter of German national socialism and his work should be understood in the context of interwar fascism. The new religious movement that he founded, ‘Beyondism’, is a neo-fascist contrivance. Cattell now promulgates ideas that he formulated within a demimonde of radical eugenists and neo-fascists that includes such associates as Revilo Oliver, Roger Pearson, Wilmot Robertson and Robert K. Graham. These ideas and Cattell's role in the history of eugenics deserve deeper analysis than they have hitherto received. Far from being of merely antiquarian interest, his work currently encourages the propagation of radical eugenist ideology. It is unconscionable for scholars to permit these ideas to go unchallenged, and indeed honored and emulated by a new generation of ideologues and academicians whose work helps to dignify the most destructive political ideas of the twentieth century. This revised version was published online in August 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

A tribute to Thomas Roosevelt Punnett, Jr. (1926-2008)

We honor here Thomas (Tom) Roosevelt Punnett, Jr. (May 25, 1926–July 4, 2008), who was a pioneer of Biology, particularly of biochemistry of plants and algae, having specialized in photosynthesis under Robert Emerson of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He did exciting work on regulation and control of various metabolic reactions. He was an innovator and raconteur par excellence, and he prized critical thinking. His enthusiasm for basic science questions was matched by his grasp of their “real-world” implications. His last project was a patent for anaerobic sewage treatment that he hoped would lead to solution of waste disposal and energy creation world wide, including the clean-up of Lake Erie, where he had sailed as a boy. On the personal side, he had a strong sense of morality and a great wit and humor.     

The Case of Paul Kammerer: Evolution and Experimentation in the Early 20th Century

To some, a misguided Lamarckian and a fraud, to others a martyr in the fight against Darwinism, the Viennese zoologist Paul Kammerer (1880–1926) remains one of the most controversial scientists of the early 20th century. Here his work is reconsidered in light of turn-of-the-century problems in evolutionary theory and experimental methodology, as seen from Kammerer’s perspective in Vienna. Kammerer emerges not as an opponent of Darwinism, but as one would-be modernizer of the 19th-century theory, which had included a role for the inheritance of acquired characteristics. Kammerer attempted a synthesis of Darwinism with genetics and the chromosome theory, while retaining the modifying effects of the environment as the main source of favorable variation, and he developed his program of experimentation to support it. Kammerer never had a regular university position, but worked at a private experimental laboratory, with sidelines as a teacher and a popular writer and lecturer. On the lecture circuit he held forth on the significance of his science for understanding and furthering cultural evolution and he satisfied his passion for the arts and performance. In his dual career as researcher and popularizer, he did not always follow academic convention. In the contentious and rapidly changing fields of heredity and evolution, some of his stances and practices, as well as his outsider status and part-Jewish background, aroused suspicion and set the stage for the scandal that ended his career and prompted his suicide.     

Tantalizing Tortoises and the Darwin-Galápagos Legend

During his historic Galápagos visit in 1835, Darwin spent nine days making scientific observations and collecting specimens on Santiago (James Island). In the course of this visit, Darwin ascended twice to the Santiago highlands. There, near springs located close to the island’s summit, he conducted his most detailed observations of Galápagos tortoises. The precise location of these springs, which has not previously been established, is here identified using Darwin’s own writings, satellite maps, and GPS technology. Photographic evidence from excursions to the areas where Darwin climbed, including repeat photography over a period of four decades, offers striking evidence of the deleterious impact of feral mammals introduced after Darwin’s visit. Exploring the impact that Darwin’s Santiago visit had on his thinking – especially focusing on his activities in the highlands – raises intriguing questions about the depth of his understanding of the evolutionary evidence he encountered while in the Galápagos. These questions and related insights provide further evidence concerning the timing of Darwin’s conversion to the theory of evolution, which, despite recent claims to the contrary, occurred only after his return to England.     

Darwin on Aristotle

Charles Darwin's famous 1882 letter, in response to a gift by his friend, William Ogle of Ogle's recent translation of Aristotle's Parts of Animals, in which Darwin remarks that his “two gods,” Linnaeus and Cuvier, were “mere school-boys to old Aristotle,” has been thought to be only an extravagantly worded gesture of politeness. However, a close examination of this and other Darwin letters, and of references to Aristotle in Darwin's earlier work, shows that the famous letter was written several weeks after a first, polite letter of thanks, and was carefully formulated and literally meant. Indeed, it reflected an authentic, and substantial, increase in Darwin's already high respect for Aristotle, as a result of a careful reading both of Ogle's Introduction and of more or less the portion of Ogle's translation which Darwin says he has read. Aristotle's promotion to the pantheon, as an examination of the basis for Darwin's admiration of Linnaeus and Cuvier suggests, was most likely the result specifically of Darwin's late discovery that the man he already knew as “one of the greatest ... observers that ever lived” (1879) was also the ancient equivalent both of the great modern systematist and of the great modern advocate of comparative functional explanation. It may also have reflected some real insight on Darwin's part into the teleological aspect of Aristotle's thought, indeed more insight than Ogle himself had achieved, as a portion of their correspondence reveals. This revised version was published online in July 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.     

Molecular set theory: II. An aspect of the biomathematical theory of sets

In an earlier paper (Molecular Set Theory: I.Bull. Math. Biophysics,22, 285–307, 1960) the author proposed a “Molecular Set Theory” as a formal mathematical meta-theoretic system for representing complex reactions not only of biological interest, but also of general chemical interest. The present paper is a refinement and extension of the earlier work along more formal algebraic lines. For example the beginnings of an algebra of molecular transformations is presented. It also emphasizes that this development, together with the genetical set theory of Woodger's and Rashevsky's set-theoretic contributions to Relational Biology, points to the existence of a biomathematical theory of sets which is not deducible from the general mathematical, abstract theory of sets.     

Walter Garstang: a retrospective

Although, Walter Garstang died over 60 years ago, his work is still cited—sometimes praised, but sometimes belittled. On the negative side, he often appropriated ideas of others without attribution, ignored earlier studies conflicting with his theories, and clung to notions like inheritance of acquired characters, progressive evolution, and saltation after many of his contemporaries were advancing toward the modern synthesis. Moreover, his evolutionary scenarios—especially his derivation of vertebrates from a sessile ascidian—have not been well supported by recent work in developmental genetics and molecular phylogenetics. On the positive side, Garstang firmly established several points of view that remain useful in the age of evolutionary development (evo-devo). He popularized the valid idea that adaptive changes in larvae combined with shifts in developmental timing (heterochrony) could radically change adult morphology and provide an escape from overspecialization. Moreover, his re-statement of the biogenetic law is now widely accepted: namely, that recapitulation results when characters at one stage of development are required for the correct formation of other characters at subsequent stages (his stepping stone model). In other words, ontogeny creates phylogeny because some developmental features are constraints, favoring particular evolutionary outcomes while excluding others. This viewpoint is a useful basis for advancing concepts of homology and for comparing the phylogeny of ontogenies across a series of animals to ascertain the timing and the nature of the underlying ontogenetic changes.