Dialogues with A Feeling for the Organism
ASWATHY & IPSHITA
Illustration sourced from Hackaday
Image credits to MIT News
Evelyn Fox Keller
(1936-2023)
A Feeling for the Organism
On September 22, 2023, 87 year old Evelyn Fox Keller breathed her last. Trained as a physicist, she wrote her PhD thesis in molecular biology, eventually doing pioneering work in the field of feminist science studies in the 1980s. She leaves behind a rich legacy of scholarship that examines 20th century biological sciences.
Evelyn Fox Keller’s 'A Feeling for the Organism' was published in 1983. This book recounts the life and the science of Barbara McClintock, a Nobel prize winning biologist known for her groundbreaking work on genetic transposition which overturned fundamental assumptions in molecular biology.
As a scientific biography, A feeling for the organism is one of its kind. Structured around actual conversations with Barbara McClintock, the book weaves together a rich tapestry of the person and her science. On reading the book, one is struck by how a vital source of the creativity that drives Barbara McClintock’s science is the deep intimacy that she shares with the organism that she studies, the maize plant, enabling her to visualise the inner workings of her plant in ways others couldn't.
Barbara McClintock with her maize plant
Image credits to Science Photo
Project Biotales and 'A Feeling for the Organism'
Our aim, through the Biotales workshops and conversations was simple: to forge a connection between the participants and their science through autobiographical accounts fashioned as outreach material. It is therefore apt that the spirit of Barbara McClintock’s scientific inquiry encapsulated in the phrase a feeling for the organism constitutes the guiding philosophy of the project.
How did we go about it?
In the workshops, participants were introduced to the last chapter of the book which summarises the vision that underpins Barbara McClintock’s science. We then collectively annotated the text, as a way to dialogue with both Barbara McClintock and Evelyn Fox Keller, both of whose voices are present in the text, and with each other. The collectively annotated texts represent a dialogue across time and space between biologists who work in starkly different scientific and sociopolitical environments, but are still able to resonate on what engaging in meaningful scientific inquiry entails and what are the enabling conditions that allow it to happen.
In the chapter, Foxkeller unravels McClintock's unique way of relating the organism that she studies, the maize plant: ‘Over and over again, she tells us one must have the time to look, the patience to ‘hear what the material has to say to you,’ the openness to ‘let it come to you’. Above all, one must have ‘a feeling for the organism’.” Emphasizing a way of looking at an organism as not “just a piece of plastic”, but as something that is impacted by and agentively responds to its environment, she speaks in a language of intimacy, of getting to know every individual plant that one studies, from when it is a seedling to a full grown plant.
Participants resonated with these ideas, at times pointing to difficulties that come in the way of intimately knowing the organism that they study. In their responses, they brought in their own experiences from their research, or knowledge of the latest developments in the field.
The “capacity for surprise” and the possibilities to sustain it within the constraints of hypothesis driven nature of biological sciences research was also a point of discussion, where participants raised genuine concerns around discarding unexplainable/negative data, or the need to interpret one’s data in ways that fit the established paradigms. Towards the end, Evelyn Fox Keller comments on the pace of modern biological sciences research and the difficulty it poses to those who take on more mystical and contemplative stances such as that of McClintock’s. Participants responded strongly to this, bringing forth important observations on the pace of research in the age of “big data”, the pressure to publish and the difficulties with keeping up in the rat race.
Below, we compile and present a selection of comments from all the three Biotales workshops. Hover over the highlighted text to view the comments:
A Feeling for the Organism- Chapter 12
Barbara McClintock
(1902-1992)
(American scientist and cytogeneticist)
There are two equally dangerous extremes to shut reason out, and to let nothing else in.
"
PASCAL
...What enabled McClintock to see further and deeper into the mysteries of genetics than her colleagues?
Her answer is simple. Over and over again, she tells us one must have the time to look, the patience to "hear what the material has to say to you," the openness to "let it come to you." Above all, one must have "a feeling for the organism."
One must understand "how it grows, understand its parts, understand when something is going wrong with it. [An organism] isn't just a piece of plastic, it's something that is constantly being affected by the environment, constantly showing attributes or disabilities in its growth. You have to be aware of all of that.... You need to know those plants well enough so that if anything changes, ... you [can] look at the plant and right away you know what this damage you see is from-something that scraped across it or something that bit it or something that the wind did." You need to have a feeling for every individual plant.
"No two plants are exactly alike. They're all different, and as a consequence, you have to know that difference," she explains. "I start with the seedling, and I don't want to leave it. I don't feel I really know the story if I don't watch the plant all the way along. So I know every plant in the field. I know them intimately, and I find it a great pleasure to know them."
This intimate knowledge, made possible by years of close association with the organism she studies, is a prerequisite for her extraordinary perspicacity. "I have learned so much about the corn plant that when I see things, I can interpret [them] right away." Both literally and figuratively, her "feeling for the organism" has extended her vision. At the same time, it has sustained her through a lifetime of lonely endeavour, unrelieved by the solace of human intimacy or even by the embrace of her profession.
Good science cannot proceed without a deep emotional investment on the part of the scientist. It is that emotional investment that provides the motivating force for the endless hours of intense, often gruelling, labour. Einstein wrote: " ... what deep longing to understand even a faint reflection of the reason revealed in this world had to be alive in Kepler and Newton so that they could in lonely work for many years disentangle the mechanism of celestial mechanics?"! But McClintock's feeling for the organism is not simply a longing to behold the "reason revealed in this world." It is a longing to embrace the world in its very being, through reason and beyond.
For McClintock, reason-at least in the conventional sense of the word-is not by itself adequate to describe the vast complexity-even mystery-of living forms. Organisms have a life and order of their own that scientists can only partially fathom. No models we invent can begin to do full justice to the prodigious capacity of organisms to devise means for guaranteeing their own survival. On the contrary, "anything you can think of you will find." In comparison with the ingenuity of nature, our scientific intelligence seems pallid.
For her, the discovery of transposition was above all a key to the complexity of genetic organisation-an indicator of the subtlety with which cytoplasm, membranes, and DNA are integrated into a single structure. It is the overall organisation, or orchestration, that enables the organism to meet its needs, whatever they might be, in ways that never cease to surprise us. That capacity for surprise gives McClintock immense pleasure. She recalls, for example, the early post-World War II studies of the effect of radiation on Drosophila: "It turned out that the flies that had been under constant radiation were more vigorous than those that were standard. Well, it was hilarious; it was absolutely against everything that had been thought about earlier. I thought it was terribly funny; I was utterly delighted. Our experience with DDT has been similar. It was thought that insects could be readily killed off with the spraying of DDT. But the insects began to thumb their noses at anything you tried to do to them."
Our surprise is a measure of our tendency to underestimate the flexibility of living organisms. The adaptability of plants tends to be especially unappreciated. "Animals can walk around, but plants have to stay still to do the same things, with ingenious mechanisms....Plants are extraordinary. For instance, ... if you pinch a leaf of a plant you set off electric pulses. You can't touch a plant without setting off an electric pulse.... There is no question that plants have [all] kinds of sensitivities.
They do a lot of responding to their environment. They can do almost anything you can think of. But just because they sit there, anybody walking down the road considers them just a plastic area to look at, [as if they're not really alive."
An attentive observer knows better. At any time, for any plant, one who has sufficient patience and interest can see the myriad signs of life that a casual eye misses: "In the summertime, when you walk down the road, you'll see that the tulip leaves, if it's a little warm, turn themselves around so their backs are toward the sun. You can just see where the sun hits them and where the sun doesn't hit. ... [Actually], within the restricted areas in which they live, they move around a great deal." These organisms "are fantastically beyond our wildest expectations."
For all of us, it is need and interest above all that induce the growth of our abilities; a motivated observer develops faculties that a casual spectator may never be aware of. Over the years, a special kind of sympathetic understanding grew in McClintock, heightening her powers of discernment, until finally, the objects of her study have become subjects in their own right; they claim from her a kind of attention that most of us experience only in relation to other persons. "Organism" is for her a code word-not simply a plant or animal ("Every component of the organism is as much of an organism as every other part")- but the name of a living form, of object-as-subject. With an uncharacteristic lapse into hyperbole, she adds: "Every time I walk on grass I feel sorry because I know the grass is screaming at me."
A bit of poetic license, perhaps, but McClintock is not a poet; she is a scientist. What marks her as such is her unwavering confidence in the underlying order of living forms, her use of the apparatus of science to gain access to that order, and her commitment to bringing back her insights into the shared language of science-even if doing so might require that language to change. The irregularities or surprises molecular biologists are now uncovering in the organisation and behaviour of DNA are not indications of a breakdown of order, but only of the inadequacies of our models in the face of the complexity of nature's actual order. Cells, and organisms, have an organisation of their own in which nothing is random.
In short, McClintock shares with all other natural scientists the credo that nature is lawful, and the dedication to the task of articulating those laws. And she shares, with at least some, the additional awareness that reason and experiment, generally claimed to be the principal means of this pursuit, do not suffice. To quote Einstein again, ..... only intuition, resting on sympathetic understanding, can lead to [these laws]; ... the daily effort comes from no deliberate intention or program, but straight from the heart."
A deep reverence for nature, a capacity for union with that which is to be known-these reflect a different image of science from that of a purely rational enterprise. Yet the two images have coexisted throughout history. We are familiar with the idea that a form of mysticism-a commitment to the unity of experience, the oneness of nature, the fundamental mystery underlying the laws of nature-plays an essential role in the process of scientific discovery. Einstein called it "cosmic religiosity." In turn, the experience of creative insight reinforces these commitments, fostering a sense of the limitations of the scientific method, and an appreciation of other ways of knowing. In all of this, McClintock is no exception. What is exceptional is her forthrightness of expression-the pride she takes in holding, and voicing, attitudes that run counter to our more customary ideas about science. In her mind, what we call the scientific method cannot by itself give us "real understanding." "It gives us relationships which are useful, valid, and technically marvellous; however, they are not the truth." And it is by no means the only way of acquiring knowledge.
That there are valid ways of knowing other than those conventionally espoused by science is a conviction of long standing for McClintock. It derives from a lifetime of experiences that science tells us little about, experiences that she herself could no more set aside than she could discard the anomalous pattern on a single kernel of corn. Perhaps it is this fidelity to her own experience that allows her to be more open than most other scientists about her unconventional beliefs. Correspondingly, she is open to unorthodox views in others, whether she agrees with them or not. She recalls, for example, a lecture given in the late 1940s at Cold Spring Harbor by Dick Roberts, a physicist from the Carnegie Institution of Washington, on the subject of extrasensory perception. Although she herself was out of town at the time, when she heard about the hostile reaction of her colleagues, she was incensed: "If they were as ignorant of the subject as I was, they had no reason for complaining."
For years, she has maintained an interest in ways of learning other than those used in the West, and she made a particular effort to inform herself about the Tibetan Buddhists: "I was so startled by their method of training and by its results that I figured we were limiting ourselves by using what we call the scientific method."
[text redacted]
Agreed! I sometimes refer to my analysis as a 'conversation' with the subject/element/object at hand. The analysis/study is both informed by our experiences and biases, and informs our experiences and biases.
Agreed! I sometimes refer to my analysis as a 'conversation' with the subject/element/object at hand. The analysis/study is both informed by our experiences and biases, and informs our experiences and biases.
She is advocating for inclusion of emotions, I have recently seen this new turn in research which is [otherwise] usually thought of as an "objective" pursuit. Next para follow in the same line as individuality of plants is also highlighted.
She is advocating for inclusion of emotions, I have recently seen this new turn in research which is [otherwise] usually thought of as an "objective" pursuit. Next para follow in the same line as individuality of plants is also highlighted.
I work with the cerebral malaria parasite, and it has its own quirks that is not well studied because its not there in the model organisms. For example, this parasite has 80-90% AT genome content which is so weird.. actually the highest AT in the living world. So why is this the case, definitely it is affected by the environment ..in this case the fluctuating host environment. But as a field we still don't know why it has such peculiar genome. Also most proteins are much bigger than any other homologs in other organisms. All of this make our life very difficult but it's so interesting at the same time.
I work with the cerebral malaria parasite, and it has its own quirks that is not well studied because its not there in the model organisms. For example, this parasite has 80-90% AT genome content which is so weird.. actually the highest AT in the living world. So why is this the case, definitely it is affected by the environment ..in this case the fluctuating host environment. But as a field we still don't know why it has such peculiar genome. Also most proteins are much bigger than any other homologs in other organisms. All of this make our life very difficult but it's so interesting at the same time.
I work with the cerebral malaria parasite, and it has its own quirks that is not well studied because its not there in the model organisms. For example, this parasite has 80-90% AT genome content which is so weird.. actually the highest AT in the living world. So why is this the case, definitely it is affected by the environment ..in this case the fluctuating host environment. But as a field we still don't know why it has such peculiar genome. Also most proteins are much bigger than any other homologs in other organisms. All of this make our life very difficult but it's so interesting at the same time.
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
In depth knowledge about the organism we are working on is losing value in the era of high throughput experiments.
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
In depth knowledge about the organism we are working on is losing value in the era of high throughput experiments.
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
In depth knowledge about the organism we are working on is losing value in the era of high throughput experiments.
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
In depth knowledge about the organism we are working on is losing value in the era of high throughput experiments.
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Yes, it takes years of experience to understand something as deep as the character or behaviour of an organism
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Yes, it takes years of experience to understand something as deep as the character or behaviour of an organism
I would take statement that with a pinch of salt. There's confidence, but you never know the underlying reason.
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
I would take statement that with a pinch of salt. There's confidence, but you never know the underlying reason.
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Research I guess tends to get lonely sometimes as you have to be alone with the problem to truly understand it. This can often cause you to detach from people at times.
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Research I guess tends to get lonely sometimes as you have to be alone with the problem to truly understand it. This can often cause you to detach from people at times.
.jpg){kind=small}
Deep emotional investment in work is a reminder that great scientific discoveries require not just intellect but also passion, intuition, and dedication.
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Deep emotional investment in work is a reminder that great scientific discoveries require not just intellect but also passion, intuition, and dedication.
A
One pursues scientific research for the shear joy, excitement and satisfaction that the pursuit provides. It is tied more to the emotional investment of that individual which stems from the passion of that individual. When one finally discovers the underlying science behind an observation, the investment is justified in that individual's eyes. And then the labour, hours invested, frustrations, emotional upheaval, marginal pay all seems worthy.
In many cases, there never is an answer - we do not even reach the destination we had set out for, and then we have to settle with what we have understood along the way, no matter how little. (In meme terms, Sabko justification nahi milta, Laxman)
B
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
The loneliness of research, coupled with no guarantee that you're going to get worthwhile results, is why there needs to be a strong support system, especially around mental health.
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
The loneliness of research, coupled with no guarantee that you're going to get worthwhile results, is why there needs to be a strong support system, especially around mental health.
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
This cements the idea that biology is an emergent property, hundreds of things happen for biology to exist so no simplified model can do justice to biology. But we need to start somewhere and we need to start from simplified models,
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Also, I feel the importance to note down each and every minute details of your system or the experiment (the metadata) which will later give us insights on why we are seeing such results
Despite centuries of research about ourselves alone....we are still far from understanding anything about ourselves
A
How much opportunity do we have for surprise in biological sciences research as we practice it today?
There is lot of scope. I recently came to know that spiders are parasitised by neuropterans. There is so much to know. Many things have been deciphered and we don't know. It is not always about what new in this world has been discovered by us. Sometimes the discovery which is new for us (which may not necessarily be new for everyone) surprises us too. Recently I found paddy like inflorescence in the lemon grass and I compared with my height and found that it can grow as tall as 8 feet (taller than me too). This also gave a small reason to feel surprised.
B
While there's plenty out there that is still unexplored. I feel researchers today are generally "scared" to report abnormalities. Not everyone is ready to report such results at the cost of being ostracised. In fact, I have seen stats regarding various papers skewing their results to match the established paradigm.
C
D
_edited.jpg){kind=small}
Where does one find surprises in hypothesis driven research? Are we leaving room for it?
E
Exploring the unexplained data rather than discarding it as "negative data" will help in this direction - maybe even bring much more understanding than we expect!
A
How much opportunity do we have for surprise in biological sciences research as we practice it today?
There is lot of scope. I recently came to know that spiders are parasitised by neuropterans. There is so much to know. Many things have been deciphered and we don't know. It is not always about what new in this world has been discovered by us. Sometimes the discovery which is new for us (which may not necessarily be new for everyone) surprises us too. Recently I found paddy like inflorescence in the lemon grass and I compared with my height and found that it can grow as tall as 8 feet (taller than me too). This also gave a small reason to feel surprised.
B
While there's plenty out there that is still unexplored. I feel researchers today are generally "scared" to report abnormalities. Not everyone is ready to report such results at the cost of being ostracised. In fact, I have seen stats regarding various papers skewing their results to match the established paradigm.
C
D
Where does one find surprises in hypothesis driven research? Are we leaving room for it?
E
Exploring the unexplained data rather than discarding it as "negative data" will help in this direction - maybe even bring much more understanding than we expect!
Even now plant research is a neglected area and major funding goes towards studying human diseases.
Plants even respond to vibrations, or energies that humans give off, even to music. There are a lot of studies showing plants thriving in response to classical music vs heavy metal
E
Exploring the unexplained data rather than discarding it as "negative data" will help in this direction - maybe even bring much more understanding than we expect!
Even now plant research is a neglected area and major funding goes towards studying human diseases.
Plants even respond to vibrations, or energies that humans give off, even to music. There are a lot of studies showing plants thriving in response to classical music vs heavy metal
Exploring the unexplained data rather than discarding it as "negative data" will help in this direction - maybe even bring much more understanding than we expect!
Plants even respond to vibrations, or energies that humans give off, even to music. There are a lot of studies showing plants thriving in response to classical music vs heavy metal
A
This reminds me of my ecology professor. We always roamed the same campus roads before that course, but she helped us practice listening and observing. The same campus roads became so much more interesting and we observed a lot more birds.
My supervisor stresses on this fact a lot. We need to pay attention to our results in order to understand it better. Sometimes we observe what we have to, but what is also visible would be ignored by us if we don't pay attention
B
Love how humans can learn so much from the observations they make, and these observations are not only dictated by the subject but also by our unique perspectives
Love how humans can learn so much from the observations they make, and these observations are not only dictated by the subject but also by our unique perspectives
Love how humans can learn so much from the observations they make, and these observations are not only dictated by the subject but also by our unique perspectives
This is a brilliant statement. I have such experience too. I had a friend Mirtunjay (unfortunately he is not alive today). He was a forest department employee with undergraduate degree only but he had keen interest in insects and spiders. He was able to notice moving insects in dense forest areas of Chhotanagpur plateau while being on a moving motorcycle. He did not have formal scientific training but due to his personal interest and perseverance he developed such a strong observational skill. He was Limca Book of Record Holder too.
About Mritunjay: Indian Entomologist article
E
Exploring the unexplained data rather than discarding it as "negative data" will help in this direction - maybe even bring much more understanding than we expect!
This is a brilliant statement. I have such experience too. I had a friend Mirtunjay (unfortunately he is not alive today). He was a forest department employee with undergraduate degree only but he had keen interest in insects and spiders. He was able to notice moving insects in dense forest areas of Chhotanagpur plateau while being on a moving motorcycle. He did not have formal scientific training but due to his personal interest and perseverance he developed such a strong observational skill. He was Limca Book of Record Holder too.
About Mritunjay: Indian Entomologist article
E
Exploring the unexplained data rather than discarding it as "negative data" will help in this direction - maybe even bring much more understanding than we expect!
It was thought that once the human genome is sequenced, we will figure out everything. We are far from that. We used to think that 'junk' DNA is useless and very recently we are acknowledging the importance of it and trying to uncover the secrets of the dark genome.
E
Exploring the unexplained data rather than discarding it as "negative data" will help in this direction - maybe even bring much more understanding than we expect!
It was thought that once the human genome is sequenced, we will figure out everything. We are far from that. We used to think that 'junk' DNA is useless and very recently we are acknowledging the importance of it and trying to uncover the secrets of the dark genome.
E
Exploring the unexplained data rather than discarding it as "negative data" will help in this direction - maybe even bring much more understanding than we expect!
Curious: have you experienced such intuitions/hunches in your research?
A
B
Yes but often those moments are less appreciated and told that would take greater amount of time and you have limited years to finish of your PhD
C
Yes Aswathy, I think once I started listening in to these "insights", my work moved forward without much of other peoples' help
Curious: have you experienced such intuitions/hunches in your research?
A
B
Yes but often those moments are less appreciated and told that would take greater amount of time and you have limited years to finish of your PhD
C
Yes Aswathy, I think once I started listening in to these "insights", my work moved forward without much of other peoples' help
This statement is giving me existential crisis.
A
An important note to all the GOD complex scientists.
B
I think everyone experiences that to some extent. It's not easy to unlearn. The acknowledgment of the need itself could be so difficult to achieve.
Above all, she is proud of her ability to draw on these other ways of knowing in her work as a scientist. It is that which, to her, makes the life of science such a deeply satisfying one even, at times, ecstatic. "What is ecstasy? I don't understand ecstasy, but I enjoy it. When I have it. Rare ecstasy."
Somehow, she doesn't know how, she has always had an "exceedingly strong feeling" for the oneness of things: "Basically, everything is one. There is no way in which you draw a line between things. What we [normally] do is to make these subdivisions, but they're not real. Our educational system is full of subdivisions that are artificial, that shouldn't be there. I think maybe poets-although I don't read poetry-have some understanding of this." The ultimate descriptive task, for both artists and scientists, is to "ensoul" what one sees, to attribute to it the life one shares with it; one learns by identification.
Much has been written on this subject, but certain remarks of Phyllis Greenacre, a psychoanalyst who has devoted a lifetime to studying the dynamics of artistic creativity, come especially close to the crux of the issue that concerns us here. For Greenacre, the necessary condition for the flowering of great talent or genius is the development in the young child of what she calls a "love affair with the world."
...Greenacre's observations are intended to describe the childhood of the young artist, but they might just as readily depict McClintock's youth. By her own account, even as a child, McClintock neither had nor felt the need of emotional intimacy in any of her personal relationships. The world of nature provided for her the "collective alternatives" of Greenacre's artists; it became the principal focus of both her intellectual and her emotional energies. From reading the text of nature, McClintock reaps the kind of understanding and fulfilment that others acquire from personal intimacy. In short, her "feeling for the organism" is the mainspring of her creativity. It both promotes and is promoted by her access to the profound connectivity of all biological forms--of the cell, of the organism, of the ecosystem.
The flip side of the coin is her conviction that, without an awareness of the oneness of things, science can give us at most only nature-in-pieces; more often it gives us only pieces of nature. In McClintock's view, too restricted a reliance on scientific methodology invariably leads us into difficulty. "We've been spoiling the environment just dreadfully and thinking we were fine, because we were using the techniques of science. Then it turns into technology, and it's slapping us back because we didn't think it through. We were making assumptions we had no right to make. From the point of view of how the whole thing actually worked, we knew how part of it worked.... We didn't even inquire, didn't even see how the rest was going on. All these other things were happening and we didn't see it."
...We're not thinking it through, just spewing it out. ...Technology is fine, but the scientists and engineers only partially think through their problems. They solve certain aspects, but not the total, and as a consequence it is slapping us back in the face very hard."
Extremely true. While we 'break' and 'compartmentalise' our knowledge and understanding of the world to make learning and teaching easier, the world is complex and interconnected. One cannot truly understand or get a holistic understanding unless we look at it as a whole and engage in the interconnectedness and inter-relationships of the whole. We need to take a step back and look at the whole.
E
Exploring the unexplained data rather than discarding it as "negative data" will help in this direction - maybe even bring much more understanding than we expect!
Have always loved this astonishing yet complementary synergy between science and art
E
Exploring the unexplained data rather than discarding it as "negative data" will help in this direction - maybe even bring much more understanding than we expect!
Capitalism, its power on science, on what we can and cannot study in science.
Capitalism, its power on science, on what we can and cannot study in science.
Since, my study includes evaluating the effect of flavonoids on different cell lines which I generally do by performing already set assays but I really wonder the effect of it on the tissues and the entire organism simultaneously.
Since, my study includes evaluating the effect of flavonoids on different cell lines which I generally do by performing already set assays but I really wonder the effect of it on the tissues and the entire organism simultaneously.
• • •
Barbara McClintock belongs to a rare genre of scientist; on a short-term view of the mood and tenor of modern biological laboratories, hers is an endangered species. Recently, after a public seminar McClintock gave in the Biology Department at Harvard University, she met informally with a group of graduate and postdoctoral students. They were responsive to her exhortation that they "take the time and look," but they were also troubled. Where does one get the time to look and to think? They argued that the new technology of molecular biology is self-propelling. It doesn't leave time. There's always the next experiment, the next sequencing to do. The pace of current research seems to preclude such a contemplative stance. McClintock was sympathetic, but reminded them, as they talked, of the "hidden complexity" that continues to lurk in the most straightforward-seeming systems. She herself had been fortunate; she had worked with a slow technology, a slow organism. Even in the old days, corn had not been popular because one could never grow more than two crops a year. But after a while, she'd found that as slow as it was, two crops a year was too fast. If she was really to analyze all that there was to see, one crop was all she could handle.
There remain, of course, always a few biologists who are able to sustain the kind of "feeling for the organism" that was so productive-both scientifically and personally-for McClintock, but to some of them the difficulties of doing so seem to grow exponentially. One contemporary, who says of her own involvement in research, "If you want to really understand about a tumor, you've got to be a tumor," put it this way: "Everywhere in science the talk is of winners, patents, pressures, money, no money, the rat race, the lot; things that are so completely alien . . . that I no longer know whether I can be classified as a modem scientist or as an example of a beast on the way to extinction."
McClintock takes a [more optimistic] view. She is confident that nature is on the side of scientists like herself. For evidence, she points to the revolution now occurring in biology. In her view, conventional science fails to illuminate not only "how" you know, but also, and equally, "what" you know. McClintock sees additional confirmation of the need to expand our conception of science in her own-and now others' discoveries. The "molecular" revolution in biology was a triumph of the kind of science represented by classical physics. Now, the necessary next step seems to be the reincorporation of the naturalist's approach-an approach that does not press nature with leading questions but dwells patiently in the variety and complexity of organisms. The discovery of genetic lability and flexibility forces us to recognise the magnificent integration of cellular processes-kinds of integration that are "simply incredible to our old-style thinking." As she sees it, we are in the midst of a major revolution that "reorganise the way we look at things, the way we do research." She adds, "And I can't wait. Because I think it's going to be marvellous, simply marvellous. We're going to have a completely new realisation of the relationship of things to each other.
Where does one get the time to look and to think?
A
Its actually up to us to set the time. nothing is self propelling at phenomenal speeds that WE need to catch up...
Though I agree from a philosophical viewpoint, checking in with reality, I would like to disagree. The field of research is now extremely lopsided to the doers. Unless you churn out paper after paper, you cannot sustain a career, and thus the resources to conduct research. There very much is a self-propelling on cell & molecular biology especially.
B
A
This is even more true in this day & age of "big data" - and I ask myself, are we really able to extract all possible meaning from even one dataset? We're now concerned with quantity, not quality.
B
That is what is ruining the curiosity I feel.
Analysing thoroughly is better than superficially analysing hundreds of data. In the age of high throughput big data generation, taking time for thorough analysis is like a lost art. We are pressured for more and more data from within and also in the scientific world. we need to sit back and analyse properly.
A
I have also felt so. After quitting PhD from JNU, it was hard for me to restart PhD again and I was looking for a stable academic position. But when I see my colleagues who could successfully complete PhD from JNU and other renowned institutions are publishing good papers, patents, etc. On the other hand, I joined a small college in Bihar and doing research at small level. I get FOMO sometimes.
B
Not sure if longing for recognition is wrong because this at least in the current scenario works like a feedback loop. You publish good, more recognition therefore more grants for researching further. And especially in fields like molecular biology, you cannot just choose to self fund what you want to research because of the associated expenses etc.
Fingers crossed for this. Hopefully within the next 5 generations this revolution will be more widely accepted. 💪🤞🍀
• • •
[The text for this chapter was sourced from: https://epistemologies.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/10/a-feeling-for-the-organism-comp.pdf]
After the participants read, reflected and discussed the text, they were invited to think about their relationships with the science that they do and write first person accounts. The work that the participants produced after they read 'A Feeling for the Organism' speaks for the power of the text. Many of the posts in the blog sections A Feeling for the Organism, Lab Life, and Field Notes feature the work produced by the participants.
Below are some articles written by Biotales participants that reveal a deep connection with the organisms that they study:
Acknowledgement: We are grateful for Ipsa Jain's contributions towards conceptualising and executing the workshops and outputs.
About Aswathy
Aswathy Raveendran is presently a faculty with the Homi Bhabha Centre for Science Education, and conducts research in the area of Science-Technology- Society Education. After a Masters level education in biological sciences, she shifted to science education research, and for her doctoral work explored how students engage with socioscientific issues related to biological sciences. Currently her research interests are in the area of critical biology studies as well as gender and science.
About Ipshita
Ipshita Raj is a visual designer, illustrator and writer, with a B.Des in Visual Communication and Strategic Branding from Srishti Manipal Institute of Art, Design and Technology. Her interests lie in science and anything creative- but especially when it comes to combining the two. Her current project observes the usage of colour and how it has changed in Indian art, through a historical lens.
Related Posts
Just Go with the Flow
BHAVNEET
"I am telling you this because I want you to understand, that you don’t have to know what you want to do in science. It’s not an intersection of roads, rather you are in a boat called Life floating in the ocean of scientific pursuits, and you can pick any direction you want. And guess what? You can always edit your course as you go along."
Share this page: