It is intriguing to see the way Stephen Jay Gould goes out to make a point in The Mismeasure of Man. When one reads the book in the beginning, one does not quickly realize the way Gould has structured his book. Gould tries to show to the reader that science is not so objective and that biological determinism is wrong. What Gould is trying to do in the book is to disprove the idea of biological determinism. He defines biological determinism as the argument that the positions of people can be ranked by biology, that's to say by their genes. However, he focuses on three theories that were mainstream in his time, which were those of ranking intelligence with a single number (IQ), the theory that mentality was predisposed in the genes and that the mind could be considered "as a single entity" (Gould 21). In pages 62 to 82, he also tries to demonstrate to us that the influence of society can permeate the works of scientists.
From pages 74 and 82, Gould discusses the life and works of Louis Agassiz. Agassiz was the Swiss naturalist who was a famous theorist of polygenism. Gould first begins by discussing the differences of monogenism and polygenism. Monogenism was the belief that the origin of humans came from one pair of people while polygenism was the belief that human races came from more than one single source. But why does Gould choose to discuss specifically Agassiz? Gould tries to deal with a prominent scientist that was not just anybody for here was one that was well respected. He's trying to show that his ideas that were widely accepted had no merit and that it was all based on prejudices existing in society and not anything objective. In other words, he trying to characterize, and thus bring down, the idea of biological determinism by taking down one of the major spokesmen of monogenism.
Gould tried to show that Agassiz's scientific research and theories were based upon his reaction towards his first encounter with a black person. Gould pointed out that Agassiz was a naturalist at first and that he had never seen a black person when he was in Europe. It wasn't until he immigrated in the U.S. and saw a black person in a hotel that Agassiz formed his ideas. The following quote was included to show Agassiz's reaction to his encounter with a black person in Philadelphia. "It was in Philadelphia that I first found myself in prolonged contact with Negroes; all the domestics in my hotel were men of color. I can scarcely express to you the painful impression that I received, especially since the feeling that they inspired in me is contrary to all our ideas about the confraternity of the human type [genre] and the unique origin of our species." With this, Gould is trying to show that all of Agassiz's ideas came as a consequence of seeing "negroes" and that his research was all based on his personal prejudice.
Gould starts out quickly by stating on page 74 that polygenism started from America, where slavery started. He's trying to show that the racist atmosphere permeated his so-called "objective" study. From there, Gould used a different strategy such that it elevated the opponents' status to the reader by revealing all his credentials such as their education. After introducing them, Gould presents their theory only to bring them down in the end. When he presents Agassiz, he does so in a way to show that he was a respected scientist by stating, "His immigration to America in the 1840s immediately elevated the status of American natural history." (Gould 75) Later in the book, Gould attacks him. On page 80, he talks about how Agassiz felt that interbreeding from different races is disgusting and shouldn't be allowed but Gould then says, "Agassiz now realizes that he has argued himself onto a corner. If interbreeding among races (separate species to Agassiz) as unnatural and repugnant, why are 'halfbreeds' so common in America" (Gould 80)
Another strategy Gould used to show his point was to show that what kind of scientist Agassiz was even before he became a polygenist. He did this by saying,
"Agassiz was an extreme splitter in his taxonomic practice. Taxonomists tend to fall into two camps-'lumpers'...and 'splitters', who focus on minute distinction and establish species on the smallest peculiarities of design. Agassiz was a splitter among splitters. He once named three genera of fossil fishes from isolated teeth that a later paleontologist found in the variable dentition of a single individual." (Gould 76)
With this Gould tried to show that even when he was a naturalist, Agassiz made many bad assumptions. In other words, Gould is trying to show to the reader that if Agassiz is able to make some simple mistakes, then he could be wrong in his beliefs of polygenism.
On page 78 Gould talks about how polygeny went against the Bible's idea of Adam and Eve. Then Gould presents a quote from Agassiz that says,
"These races must have originated...in the same numerical proportions, and over the same area, in which they now occur ...They cannot have originated in single individuals, but must have been created in that numeric harmony which is characteristic of each species; men must have originated in nations, as the bees have originated in swarms" (Gould 78)
Basically Agassiz is trying to defend his position. Then Gould sneaks in a quote right after that where Agassiz says
"There are upon earth different races of men, inhabiting different parts of its surface, which have different physical characters; and this fact...presses upon us the obligation to settle the relative rank among these races, the relative value of the characters peculiar to each, in a scientific point of view...As philosophers it is our duty to look it in the face" (Gould 78)
This is very critical to what Gould is trying to do. Why you ask? The first quote sets out to show a scientific view, i.e. polygeny; that Agassiz is supporting. This is somewhat science going against religion. However, the second quote shows more the opinions of Agassiz that some races are superior to others. Gould is trying to show the contrast of both quotes. One is more of a scientific view while the other is an opinion that has somehow gone in his experiments. The uses of these quotes are very good in pointing out his point. Gould also included the quote, "The indominable, courageous, proud Indian-in how very different a light he stands by the side of the submissive, obsequious, imitative negro, or by the side of the tricky, cunning, and cowardly Mongolian! Are not these facts indications that the different races do not rank upon one level is nature." (Gould 78) Gould is attempting to show us that this is an opinion, successfully I might add, and thus demonstrating how the prejudice of Agassiz influenced his science. This, shows that Agassiz is not as objective as he claims to be n his belief of polygenism.
These strategies used by the author works well in making its case that science is influenced by society and that biological determinism is wrong. It was effective in getting his points across to the reader, especially the strategy of establishing Agassiz as a well known and respected scientist and then showing his various fallacies which he based his research. However, equally effective is the strategy of trying to show a link of the racist attitude that is demonstrated from Agassiz's description of his first encounter with a black person and his theories blacks being a separate, inferior race. One can even say that his research was based on his reactive feelings in order to justify them. These strategies combined with the progressive order of his data are triumphant in presenting Gould's' case against biological determinism.
With this we cannot view against science as being objective as before and we have to realize even respected scientists are not free from their prejudices influencing their research. If respected scientists are able to fall through the prejudice of society, then one can no longer view all research as free from external forces. Does Gould want us to dismiss all science? Of course not, because this only means that one must regard science with a distrustful eye and be able to do their own research before they can so easily accept new ideas.
Bibliography
Gould, Stephen Jay. The Mismeasure of Man. New York: W. W. Norton, 1996.