Twin research, revisionism and metahistory.
We understand metahistory as an approach that studies how histories within a particular discipline have been written and focus on insider scientists' reconstructions of twin research. Using the concept of ethical-political affordances we suggest that such histories are based on a management of resources that prove to be beneficial for representing one's own research traditions in a positive light. Instead of discussing information on the context and intellectual life of pioneers of the twin method, which include high-caliber eugenicists and Nazi ideologues, and on how the twin method has been used and abused, insider scientists' accounts present twin research as neutral, objective and void of any kind of political connotations. We show how important leaders of German twin research have been historically managed, and how their contributions have been distorted and omitted. Reasons for historical revisionism by omission and for selectively revised accounts of the past are discussed. Suggestions for writing accounts of the twin method are included and focus on the necessity of self-reflection, considerations regarding one's own ethical-political inclinations, and review of the existing historical literature. In analyzing these connections, we attempt to understand how science, politics and history interact.
Teo
Thomas
T
York Univ., Toronto.
Ball
Laura C
LC
D005053:Eugenics / Q000266:history; D005824:Genetics, Behavioral / Q000193:education / Q000266:history; D006663:Historiography; D049672:History, 19th Century; D049673:History, 20th Century; D028683:National Socialism / Q000266:history; D011056:Political Systems / Q000266:history; D012106:Research / Q000193:education / Q000266:history; D012108:Research Personnel / Q000193:education / Q000266:history / Q000523:psychology; D012586:Science / Q000193:education / Q000266:history; D018433:Twin Studies as Topic / Q000266:history; D014427:Twins / Q000208:ethnology / Q000502:physiology / Q000523:psychology