Between 1945 and 1953, while the Soviet Union confronted postwar reconstruction and Cold War crises, its unchallenged leader Joseph Stalin carved out time to study scientific disputes and dictate academic solutions. He spearheaded a discussion of "scientific" Marxist-Leninist philosophy, edited reports on genetics and physiology, adjudicated controversies about modern physics, and wrote essays on linguistics and political economy. Historians have been tempted to dismiss all this as the megalomaniacal ravings of a dying dictator. But in Stalin and the (...) class='Hi'>Soviet Science Wars, Ethan Pollock draws on thousands of previously unexplored archival documents to demonstrate that Stalin was in fact determined to show how scientific truth and Party doctrine reinforced one another. Socialism was supposed to be scientific, and science ideologically correct, and Stalin ostensibly embodied the perfect symbiosis between power and knowledge. Focusing on six major postwar debates in the Soviet scientific community, this elegantly written book shows that Stalin's forays into scholarship can be understood only within the context of international tensions, institutional conflicts, and the growing uncertainty about the proper relationship between scientific knowledge and Party-dictated truths. The nature of Stalin's interventions makes clear that more was at stake than high politics: these science wars were about asserting that the Party was rational and modern, and about codifying the Soviet worldview in a battle for the hearts and minds of people around the globe during the early Cold War. Ultimately, however, the effort to develop a scientific basis for Soviet ideology undermined the system's legitimacy. (shrink)

What is the relationship between the field of science and the philosophy of dialectical materialism in the Soviet Union? Ninety-five per cent of the fears and misgivings expressed by American writers in regard to this subject are quite unwarranted. They have been arrived at, not by any use of the scientific method of carefully examining observable facts, but by accepting the superficialities and distortions of the sensational press, and by making sweeping “deductions” from wholly unverified premises, or from (...) isolated and exceptional instances. Some scientists who would not dream of approaching their own field of specialty in any such manner apparently feel that the complex problem of the relations between science and a certain philosophy within a new society can be so approached. (shrink)

A study of informal networks in Soviet science, this article documents the existence of a complex system of interlocking and overlapping channels ofprofessional communication that cut across the formal, hierarchical chains of command in the USSR Academy of Sciences. Through coauthorship data and career histories, one can identify science schools, research groups, social circles, and professional cliques in the Soviet scientific community during the Stalin, Khrushchev, and Brezhnev regimes. There was an expansion and integration of social (...) circles over time and a pluralism of interdependent, but distinct, scientific elites. This structure took on political significance through the persistence of a liberal democratic tradition among scientists in the Academy. (shrink)

There is a sense in which a philosophic theory can be confirmed. We may ask what its effects were on the development of scientific theory,—did it clarify ideas and help open up new areas of research, or did it constrain the work of science? In this essay, we shall try to judge the significance of dialectical materialism from this standpoint. We shall be concerned with the bearing of this philosophy on scientific work, especially in the Soviet Union.Now dialectical (...) materialism is not a “philosophy” in the same sense which the word has when applied to, let us say, logical empiricism. The difference is evident when a writer like Haldane asks, for instance, how far scientific discoveries have verified the principles of dialectical materialism.' We could not ask in a similar way whether scientific discoveries have confirmed the principles of logical empiricism. For the latter affirms no factual propositions concerning the world; it enunciates solely the principle of verifiability, and there is clearly no scientific discovery which could possibly refute the requirement of verification. If it makes sense to ask how far scientific discoveries verify dialectical materialism, then the latter must obviously contain factual propositions concerning nature which should be stated in a way to permit of confirmation of rejection. (shrink)

Naukovedenie (literarily meaning ‘science studies’), was first institutionalized in the Soviet Union in the twenties, then resurfaced and was widely publicized in the sixties, as a new mode of reflection on science, its history, its intellectual foundations, and its management, after which it dominated Soviet historiography of science until perestroika . Tracing the history of meta-studies of science in the USSR from its early institutionalization in the twenties when various political, theoretical and institutional struggles (...) set the stage for the development of the field, to the sixties when the field resurfaced within the particular political context of the Cold War, and using the history of Moscow Institute for the History of Science and Technology as a case-study, I situate Soviet naukovedenie project within the culture of late-socialism in the Soviet Union during the Cold War, asking what this discourse meant for its creators and practitioners, as well as for the high-ranked Soviet officials who provided the authoritative support for this field. (shrink)

ArgumentPost-Stalinist reforms resulted in dramatic changes in the ways of operation of Soviet science: one can say that they altered the very understanding of what science was, or should be, in the socialist society. A new vision came about as a result of political and rhetorical efforts of scientists, who pushed forward their various, often conflicting, agendas acting in accordance with specific rules of Soviet polity. The most visible part of the reform came with the 1961 (...) administrative reorganization of the USSR Academy of Sciences. The related series of changes, however, was much broader and comprehensive, modifying the relationships between science and ideology, politicians and academic researchers, and establishing the very division between fundamental and applied research, which had been strongly rejected during the preceding Stalinist period. (shrink)

The article is a study into the advent of the ‘systems approach’ in Soviet psychology in the 1970s. This arose mainly through the theoretical publications of B. F. Lomov, written after he had been appointed director of the newly established Institute of Psychology. These publications are examined as reflections of those interests related to the sociopolitical role of the director of this leading psychology institution, which was officially charged with building a common theoretical and methodological framework for all (...) class='Hi'>Soviet psychology. The main goal of these texts, predetermined by the role of their author, was to advance a theoretical scheme that made possible a formal unification of the schools of psychology, and which at the same time promoted an image of psychology as a research field that was both capable of achieving practically applicable results and compatible with the new ‘big science’ trend. (shrink)

Originally published in 1961. Russian Marxist philosophy of science originated among men and women who gave their whole lives to rebellion against established authority. The original tension within Marxist philosophy between positivism and metaphysics was repressed but not resolved in this first phase of Soviet Marxism. In this volume the author correlates the development of ideas with trends in the Cultural Revolution and against this background it is possible to understand why debates over general philosophy gave way to (...) conflicts over specific sciences in the aftermath of the first Five Year Plan and why there was a genuine crisis in Soviet biology. (shrink)

In the summer of 1925, a debutant writer, Aleksandr Beliaev, published a ‘scientific-fantastic story’, which depicted the travails of a severed human head living in a laboratory, supported by special machinery. Just a few months later, a young medical researcher, Sergei Briukhonenko, succeeded in reviving the severed head of a dog, using a special apparatus he had devised to keep the head alive. This paper examines the relationship between the literary and the scientific experiments with severed heads in post-revolutionary Russia, (...) which reflected the anxieties about death, revival, and survival in the aftermath of the 1914–1923 ‘reign of death’ in that country. It contrasts the anguished ethical questions raised by the story with the public fascination for ‘science that conquers death’. (shrink)

The science fiction films of Andrei Tarkovsky, Solaris (1973) and Stalker (1979), are complex responses to the repressive atmosphere of Brezhnev’s rule, after the 7-year delay in seeing Andrei Rublev (1971) released publicly. By using science fiction—a genre that Tarkovsky openly maligned—he was able to fly beneath the radar of State censorship, and develop a nuanced response to the application of Marxist theory of religion in the Soviet experience. Arguing in these films (and in others in his (...) oeuvre) that humans still need the affective dimension of religion (though not the hierarchical, institutional elements of it that Marx had identified with sedation), Tarkovsky hid within his science fiction films a thoroughgoing critique of the Soviet application of Marx. This article uses the concept of “war machine” from the philosophy of Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari to analyze how Tarkovsky did this, and demonstrates that Tarkovsky’s engagement with Marx’s philosophy in these two films shares much in common with Deleuze and Guattari’s way of understanding human meaning making. (shrink)

Originally published in 1961. Russian Marxist philosophy of science originated among men and women who gave their whole lives to rebellion against established authority. The original tension within Marxist philosophy between positivism and metaphysics was repressed but not resolved in this first phase of Soviet Marxism. In this volume the author correlates the development of ideas with trends in the Cultural Revolution and against this background it is possible to understand why debates over general philosophy gave way to (...) conflicts over specific sciences in the aftermath of the first Five Year Plan and why there was a genuine crisis in Soviet biology. (shrink)

A comparative study of the system of co-evolution of Theoretical Genetics, practical Selets and agriculture in Russia, Ukraine, the Soviet Union and, above all, the example of two research schools - Kharkov and Saratov. Alittle-known and previously unknown archival materials are used.

The intellectual movement to interpret fascism, Nazism, and Stalinism as “political religions” has generated lively debates and an intensive publication program for over a decade. The scholarly trend has been closely associated with a revival of the concept of totalitarianism, reconfigured to account for the popular appeal and violent fervor of twentieth-century mass movements of the extreme right and left. As theoreticians of political religion have been preoccupied with arguments about the definition of religion and the problems of comparison, two (...) stumbling blocks have become increasingly apparent. First, historians of Soviet communism, who since the early 1990s have empirically and conceptually transformed the study of Stalinism and Soviet history, have either exhibited “utter neglect” of the political-religion concept or have shunned it due to the scientism and official atheism of the regime. As a result, comparisons in the political-religion mode have generally been carried out by scholars not expert in Soviet history. Second, and closely related to this, even sympathetic critics have found secular religion too blunt a tool and too generic a concept to probe the “novel, supranational, but historically specific... sense of mission” produced by radical interwar regimes. Soviet communism as a project, more than fascism, was deeply invested in viewing its own ideology as genuinely scientific. (shrink)

Mit dieser studie will der autor zur erforschung zeitgenossischer sowjetischer reflexionen uber das wesen der philosophie beitragen und bemuht sich dabei, das verhaltnis der sowjetischen offentlichkeit zu wissenschaft und gesellschaftlicher praxis zu beleuchten. samtliche thesen uber das wesen der philosophie bewegen sich im umfeld ontologischer, gnoseologischer, soziologischer und synthetischer philosophischer konzeptionen, selbstverstandlich unter berufung auf die grundsatze der philosophie des dialektischen materialismus. (edited).

Dichotomous analysis is used as a method to identify the contradictory nature and ways of adaption demonstrated by representatives of the Moscow School of Religious Studies (MSRS) in the combination of science and ideology specific to the Soviet period. This study proves that scholars can rarely be completely autonomous since their socio-political environment invariably affects their academic stance. In the late 1950s, Soviet religious studies were characterized by historicism. By the 1960s, Soviet authorities realized that the (...) destruction of churches and persecution of clerics failed to eradicate religious beliefs. Ideological setbacks in atheistic education were recognized at the highest party level. Fundamentals of Religion and Atheism as an academic discipline came to be deeply embedded in philosophical knowledge and tertiary education. The MSRS demonstrated four forms of scholars’ adaptation to the ideological suppression of the late Soviet period. The first form is represented by die-hard atheists, who were talented scholars and formulated the scientific methodology of religious studies. The second group includes scholars who performed tasks of two types: research and propaganda. The third form is represented by idealist researchers who tried to combine Marxism and religion. The fourth type of scientific conformism includes scholars who turned religion from a “harmful relic” into an organic component of human culture. The authors strive to demonstrate the unprecedented role of the MSRS in the development of Russian religious studies, while emphasizing the varying degree of scientific merit that the works of different writers have for the current development of religious studies. (shrink)

Ideological considerations have always influenced science, butrarely as directly and massively as in the Soviet Union during the early Cold War period, when cosmology was among the sciences that became politicized. This field of science developed very differently in the Communist countries than in the West, in large measure because of political pressure. Certain cosmological models, in particular of the big bang type, were declared pseudo-scientific and idealistic because they implied a cosmic creation, a concept which was (...) taken to be religious. The result of the ideological pressure was not an independent Soviet cosmology, but that astronomers and physicists abandoned cosmological research in the Western sense. Onlyin the 1960s did this situation change, and cosmology in the Soviet Union began to flourish. The paper reviews the relationship between cosmology and political ideology in the Soviet Union from about 1947 to 1963, and it briefly relates this case to the later one in the People’s Republic of China. (shrink)

Through a detailed study of the group surrounding Andronov and Grekhova, this article highlights how the configuration of the interaction between techno-science, the State, and production appears to be very specific to the Soviet Union, as compared to the United States or France. We are often used to thinking of the relationship between science and its context by postulating that the core of scientific content is universal while context is variable. This study suggests rather the opposite. For (...) indeed, the local and specific nature of the scientific culture and tradition of nonlinearity in Gor'kiy must be emphasized. It is the political context of World War II and of the Cold War that forced the unification with Western science, in that they set theoretical targets and technical objectives, and stimulated the manufacture of identical products, such as radar and nuclear devices, automated systems, etc. In short, in the relationship of politics and science that is examined here, it is the politics which created unity and universality. (shrink)