Journal of the History of Biology

, Volume 36, Issue 2, pp 309–352

C.D. Darlington and the British and American Reaction to Lysenko and the Soviet Conception of Science

  • Oren Solomon Harman


The Anglo-American reaction to the Lysenkoaffair has been treated primarily either fromthe point of view of the political Right orLeft, or as a consequence of post-WWIIinternational relations. None of the accountshave considered the central role of the Britishcytogeneticist and evolutionist C.D.Darlington. This article considers Darlington'srole, and illustrates how, through an analysisof his divergent reaction, it becomes possibleto see the response to Lysenko as a reflectionof internal scientific and political debatesconcerning the planning, funding, utility, andfreedom of science in post-war Britain.

C.D. Darlington divergence J.B.S. Haldane Lysenko affair planning racialist scientific humanism Society for the Freedom of Science ``Two Camps'' philosophy of science strategy 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Ashby, Eric. 1947. Scientist in Russia. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  2. Baker, J.R. 1939. “Counterblast to Bernalism.” New Statesman and Nation 18: 174–175.Google Scholar
  3. —— 1942. The Scientific Life. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  4. —— 1945. Science and the Planned State. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  5. Barkan, Elazar. 1992. The Retreat of Scientific Racism. Changing Concepts of Race in Britain and the United States Between the Wars. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  6. Bernal, J.D. 1939. The Social Function of Science. London: G. Rutledge and Sons.Google Scholar
  7. —— 1949. “The Biological Controversy in the Soviet Union and Its Implications.” Modern Quarterly 4: 203–218.Google Scholar
  8. Blacket, P.M.S. 1953. “Operational Research.” Brassey's Annual (1953): 88–106.Google Scholar
  9. Bowler, Peter. 1984. “E.W. MacBride's Lamarckian Eugenics.” Annals of Science 4: 245–260.Google Scholar
  10. Brightman, R. 1936. “The Protection of Scientific Freedom.” Nature 137: 963–964.Google Scholar
  11. Brightman, R. 1937. “Social Responsibilities of Science.” Nature 139: 689.Google Scholar
  12. Clarck, Ronald W. 1968. J.B.S.: The Life andWork of J.B.S. Haldane. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Conquest, Robert. 1987. The Harvest of Sorrow: Soviet Collectivization and the Terror-Famine. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Crane, M.B. 1949. “The Moscow Conference on Genetics.” Heredity 3: 252–261.Google Scholar
  15. Crowther, J.G. 1936. Soviet Science. New York: E.P. Dutton.Google Scholar
  16. —— 1941. The Social Relations of Science. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  17. —— 1970. Fifty Years With Science. London: Barrie and Jenkins.Google Scholar
  18. Darlington, C.D. 1939. The Evolution of Genetic Systems. Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. —— 1941. “The Cleavage in Biology.” Nature 147: 544.Google Scholar
  20. —— 1942a. “The Revolution in Education.” World Review, October: 33–39.Google Scholar
  21. —— 1943. “Race, Class and Mating in the Evolution of Man.” Nature 152: 315–319.Google Scholar
  22. —— 1947a. “A Revolution in Russian Science.” Discovery 8: 40–43.Google Scholar
  23. —— 1947b. “Retreat From Science in Soviet Russia.” The Nineteenth Century and After 142: 157–168.Google Scholar
  24. —— 1948. The Conflict of Science and Society, Delivered at Conway Hall, Red Lion Square, on April 20, 1948 by C.D. Darlington, F.R.S. London: Watts and Co.Google Scholar
  25. —— 1968. “Determined But Lonely.” Nature 220: 933–934.Google Scholar
  26. —— 1969. “Haldane's Influence.” Nature 222: 56–57.Google Scholar
  27. Darlington, C.D., and Harland S.C. 1945. “Nikolai Ivanovich Vavilov, 1885–1942.” Nature 156: 621.Google Scholar
  28. Dobzhansky, Theodosius. 1946. “Lysenko's Genetics.” Journal of Heredity 37: 5–9.Google Scholar
  29. —— 1947. “N.I. Vavilov, A Martyr of Genetics.” Journal of Heredity 38: 227–232.Google Scholar
  30. —— 1949. “The Suppression of a Science.” Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, May.Google Scholar
  31. Dronamjaru, K.R. 1969. Haldane and Modern Biology. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  32. —— 1995. Haldane's Daedalus Revisited. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  33. Dubinin, N.P. 1947. “Work of Soviet Biologists: Theoretical Genetics.” Science 165: 109–112.Google Scholar
  34. Dunn, Leslie. 1946. “Review: Heredity and Its Variability.” Science 103: 180–181.Google Scholar
  35. Fyfe, J.L. 1948. “The Soviet Genetics Controversy.” Modern Quarterly 3, Winter: 348.Google Scholar
  36. —— 1950. Lysenko Is Right. London: Lawrence and Wishart.Google Scholar
  37. Gorer, Geoffrey. 1936. Nobody Talks Politics. London: M. Joseph.Google Scholar
  38. Gould, Steven Jay. 1983. Hen's Teeth and Horses Toes. New York: Norton.Google Scholar
  39. Graham, Loren. 1972. Science and Philosophy in the Soviet Union. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
  40. Haldane, J.B.S. 1928. Possible Worlds and Other Essays. London: Harper and Brothers.Google Scholar
  41. —— 1932. The Inequality of Man and Other Essays. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  42. —— 1938a. Heredity and Politics. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  43. —— 1939. Science and Everyday Life. London: Lawrence and Wishart.Google Scholar
  44. —— 1940. Science in Peace and War. London: Lawrence and Wishart.Google Scholar
  45. —— 1938b. “A Note on Genetics in the U.S.S.R.” Modern Quarterly 1: 393–394.Google Scholar
  46. Haldane, J.S. 1931. The Philosophical Basis of Biology. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  47. —— 1935. The Philosophy of a Biologist. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  48. Hogben, Lancelot. 1939. Dangerous Thoughts. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  49. Hudson, P.S. and Richens, R.S. 1946. The New Genetics in the Soviet Union. Cambridge: Imperial Bureau of Plant Breeding and Genetics.Google Scholar
  50. Hutchinson, Eric. 1970. “Scientists as an Inferior Class.” Minerva 8: 396–411.Google Scholar
  51. Huxley, Julian, and Haddon, A.C. 1935. We Europeans: A Survey of “Racial” Problems. New York: Harper and Bros.Google Scholar
  52. Huxley, Julian. 1932. A Scientist Among the Soviets. London: Chatto and Windus.Google Scholar
  53. —— 1945. “Evolutionary Biology and Related Subjects.” Nature 156: 256.Google Scholar
  54. Huxley, Julian. 1947. Unesco: Its Purpose and its Philosophy. Washington: Public Affairs Press.Google Scholar
  55. —— 1949. “Soviet Genetics: The Real Issue.” Nature 163: 934–942, 974–982.Google Scholar
  56. —— 1949. Soviet Genetics and World Science. London: Chatto and Windus.Google Scholar
  57. Jones, Greta. 1988. Science, Politics, and the Cold War. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  58. Joravsky, David. 1970. The Lysenko Affair. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  59. Kevles, Daniel. 1995. In the Name of Eugenics. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  60. King, Michael D. 1968. “Science and the Professional Dilemma.” Julius Gould (ed.), Penguin Social Sciences Survey 1968. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  61. Koestler, Arthur. 1941. Darkness at Noon. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  62. —— 1969. Arrow in the Blue. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  63. Korol, Alexander G. 1965. Soviet Research and Development: Its Organization, Personnel and Funds. MIT Press.Google Scholar
  64. Krementsov, Nikolai. 1996. “A Second Front in Soviet Genetics: The International Dimension of the Lysenko Controversy, 1944–1947.” Journal of the History of Biology 29: 229–250.Google Scholar
  65. —— 1998. Stalinist Science. Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  66. Langdon Davis, John. 1949. Russia Puts the Clock Back: A Study of Soviet Science and Some British Scientists. London: Gollancz.Google Scholar
  67. Lasky, Harold. 1939. “The Danger of Being a Gentleman: Reflections on the Ruling Class in England” (1932) in his The Danger of Being a Gentleman, and Other Essays. London: Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
  68. Lecourt, Dominique. 1977. Proletarian Science? The Case of Lysenko. London: NLB.Google Scholar
  69. Lewontin, Richard, and Levins, Richard. 1976. “The Problem of Lysenkoism.” H. Rose and S. Rose (eds.), The Radicalization of Science: Ideology of/in the Natural Sciences. London: Macmillan.Google Scholar
  70. Lysenko, T.D. 1946. Heredity and Its Variability. Dobzhansky, Theodosius (trans.). New York: King's Crown Press.Google Scholar
  71. Marwick, Arthur. 2000. A History of the Modern British Isles 1914–1999. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  72. Maynard Smith, John. 1992. “J.B.S. Haldane.” S. Sarkar (ed.), The Founders of Evolutionary Genetics. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Press, pp. 37–52.Google Scholar
  73. McCulloch, Gary. 1988. “A Technocratic Vision: The Ideology of School Science Reform in Britain in the 1950s.” Social Studies of Science 18: 703–724.Google Scholar
  74. McGucken, William. 1984. Scientists, Society, and State: The Social Relations of Science Movement in Great Britain 1931–1947. Ohio State University Press.Google Scholar
  75. Medvedev, Zhores. 1969. The Rise and Fall of T.D. Lysenko. Michael Lerner (trans.). Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  76. Meyer, Jeffrey. 2000. Orwell: Wintry Conscience of a Generation. New York: W.W. Norton.Google Scholar
  77. Needham, Joseph and Sykes Davies, Jane (eds.). 1942. Science in Soviet Russia. London: Watts and Co.Google Scholar
  78. Needham, Joseph. 1938. “Genetics in the U.S.S.R.” Modern Quarterly 1: 370–371.Google Scholar
  79. —— 1941. The Nazi Attack on International Science. London: Watts and Co.Google Scholar
  80. —— 1941. “Biological Science in the U.S.S.R.” Nature 148: 362–363.Google Scholar
  81. Orwell, S. and Angus, I. (eds.). 1970. The Collected Essays, Journalism, and Letters of George Orwell. Harmondsworth: Penguin Books.Google Scholar
  82. Paul, Diane. 1979. “Marxism, Darwinism, and the Theory of Two Sciences.” Marxist Perspectives 2: 116–143.Google Scholar
  83. —— 1983. “AWar on Two Fronts: J.B.S Haldane and the Response to Lysenkoism in Britain.” Journal of the History of Biology 16: 1–37.Google Scholar
  84. Pike, R.M. 1961. The Growth of Scientific Institutions and the Employment of Natural Science Graduates in Britain 1900–1960. Unpublished M.Sc. Thesis, University of London.Google Scholar
  85. Polanyi, Michael. 1940. The Contempt of Freedom. London: Watts and Co.Google Scholar
  86. —— 1951. The Logic of Liberty. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  87. —— 1966. The Tacit Dimension. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.Google Scholar
  88. Popovsky, Mark. 1984. The Vavilov Affair. Hamden, Conn.: Archon Books.Google Scholar
  89. Roll-Hansen, N. 1985. “A New Perspective on Lysenko.” Annals of Science 42: 261–278.Google Scholar
  90. —— 1989. “The Practice Criterion and the Rise of Lysenkoism.” Science Studies 1: 3–16.Google Scholar
  91. Rose, Hilary and Steven. 1969. Science and Society. London: Allen Lane.Google Scholar
  92. Sarkar, Sahotra. 1992. “Science, Philosophy, and Politics in the Work of J.B.S. Haldane, 1922–1937.” Biology and Philosophy 7: 385–409.Google Scholar
  93. Sax, Karl. 1944. “Soviet Biology.” Science 99: 298–299.Google Scholar
  94. —— 1947. “Soviet Science and Political Philosophy.” The Scientific Monthly LXV: 43–47.Google Scholar
  95. Searle, G.R. 1979. “Eugenics and Politics in Britain in the 1930s.” Annals of Science 36: 159–169.Google Scholar
  96. Shipman, Pat. 1994. The Evolution of Racism. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  97. Solly Zuckerman, 1939. “Science and Society.” New Statesman and Nation: 298.Google Scholar
  98. Soyfer, Valery N. 1994. Lysenko and the Tragedy of Soviet Science. Gruliow, Leo and Rebecca (trans.). Rutgers University Press.Google Scholar
  99. Stepan, Nancy. 1982. The Idea of Race in Science: Great Britain 1800–1960. London: MacMillan.Google Scholar
  100. Strachey, John. 1933. The Coming Struggle for Power. New York: Covici.Google Scholar
  101. Sturdy, S. 1988. “Biology as Social Theory: John Scott Haldane and Physiological Regulation.” British Journal of the History of Science 21: 315–340.Google Scholar
  102. Sturtevant, A.H. 1965. A History of Genetics. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
  103. Sturtevant, A.H. and Beadle, G.W. 1939. An Introduction to Genetics. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders.Google Scholar
  104. Thurlow, Richard. 1987. Fascism in Britain: A History, 1918–1985. Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  105. Uvarov, P.B. 1937. “Genetics and Plant Breeding in the USSR.” Nature 140: 297.Google Scholar
  106. Vig, Norman J. 1968. Science and Technology in British Politics. Oxford: Pergamon Press.Google Scholar
  107. Webb, Sidney and Beatrice. 1937. Soviet Communism: A New Civilization. New York: C. Scribner's Sons.Google Scholar
  108. Werskey, Gary. 1971. “British Scientists and ‘Outsider’ Politics, 1931–1945.” Science Studies 1: 67–83.Google Scholar
  109. —— 1988. The Visible College. London: A. Lane.Google Scholar
  110. Whyte, R.O. 1948. “History of Research in Vernalization.” A.E. Murneek and R.O. Whyte (eds.), Vernalization and Photoperiodism. Waltham, Mass: Chronica Botanica Company, pp. 1–38.Google Scholar
  111. Wilson, E.O. 1978. On Human Nature. Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  112. Wood, Neal. 1959. Communism and British Intellectuals. Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
  113. Zhebrak, Anton. 1945. “Soviet Biology.” Science 102: 357.Google Scholar
  114. Zirkle, Conway. (ed.) 1949. Death of a Science in Russia. University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  115. —— 1949. Death of a Science in Russia. University of Pennsylvania Press.Google Scholar
  116. Zuckerman, Solly. 1978. From Apes to Warlords: The Autobiography (1904–1946) of Solly Zuckerman. London: Hamilton.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Oren Solomon Harman
    • 1
  1. 1.Sidney M. Edelstein Center, For the History and Philosophy of Science, Technology and MedicineThe Hebrew University of JerusalemJerusalemIsrael

Personalised recommendations