2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1468-2265.2011.00646_52.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Why I Am Not A Scientist: Anthropology and Modern Knowledge. By Jonathan Marks

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2011
2011
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
2

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The Morton case was used by Gould as the main support for his contention that ''unconscious or dimly perceived finagling is probably endemic in science, since scientists are human beings rooted in cultural contexts, not automatons directed toward external truth'' [1]. This view has since achieved substantial popularity in ''science studies'' [2][3][4]. But our results falsify Gould's hypothesis that Morton manipulated his Box 3.…”
Section: Biased Scientists Are Inevitable Biased Results Are Notmentioning
confidence: 68%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…The Morton case was used by Gould as the main support for his contention that ''unconscious or dimly perceived finagling is probably endemic in science, since scientists are human beings rooted in cultural contexts, not automatons directed toward external truth'' [1]. This view has since achieved substantial popularity in ''science studies'' [2][3][4]. But our results falsify Gould's hypothesis that Morton manipulated his Box 3.…”
Section: Biased Scientists Are Inevitable Biased Results Are Notmentioning
confidence: 68%
“…Stephen Jay Gould, the prominent evolutionary biologist and science historian, argued that ''unconscious manipulation of data may be a scientific norm'' because ''scientists are human beings rooted in cultural contexts, not automatons directed toward external truth'' [1], a view now popular in social studies of science [2][3][4]. In support of his argument Gould presented the case of Samuel George Morton, a 19th-century physician and physical anthropologist famous for his measurements of human skulls.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…What I have intended to offer here in this perspective is a path wherein biological anthropology can grow, make a difference and be more relevant inside and outside of the academy. Let me stress what I present here is only one view of biological anthropology (however, see also Kissel, 2019, Marks, 2009, Willermet & Lee, 2019 for similar views). Anyone can disagree.…”
Section: Biological Anthropology and Genomics2mentioning
confidence: 79%
“…This history, or I should say these histories, have shaped and structured biological anthropology in important ways, often negatively. Numerous authors have recently reviewed such histories and their impacts (e.g., Athreya & Ackermann, 2019; Caspari, 2018; Ellison, 2018; Marks, 2009; Nelson, 2019; Perez, 2019; Saini, 2019; Sussman, 2016; Vergara & Lopez‐Beltran, 2019; Watkins, 2012; Wilson, 2019a) so I will not go into any detail here, but I encourage everyone teaching and doing Biological Anthropology to include such readings in your cannon.…”
Section: An Aside To History and The Departure From A Physical Anthro...mentioning
confidence: 99%