A Rift Over Carl Linnaeus Shows We Shouldn’t Idolize Scientists
By Brian Lovett,
Undark
| 08. 06. 2020
The traditions we carry into the future, including who we choose to honor, should be able to withstand modern scrutiny.
WE ARE LIVING through a period of cultural upheaval. Around the world, statues of iconic men who held racist beliefs and committed racial injustices are being ripped from their pedestals. The dull thud of metal bodies hitting concrete rings fresh in our ears, and many of us are still grappling with what these reverberations mean.
Statues of racists are monuments to the dregs of our society. Yet over time, their pedestals have crept so high that, for some people, it has become unthinkable that any scandal could justify their removal. Today, these memorialized men look down on us from high places that they do not deserve; the scandal is that society has for so long respected the inertia of their corrupting influence.
One such figure is the 18th century Swedish botanist Carl Linnaeus. He devised binomial nomenclature, the ubiquitous system now used to scientifically classify organisms by genus and species. He then used his nomenclature to classify humans by “variety,” ascribing inherently positive traits to lighter-skinned Europeans and negative traits to darker-skinned Africans and Asians, thereby laying a pseudoscientific foundation for...
Related Articles
Several recent Biopolitical Times posts (1, 2, 3, 4) have called attention to the alarmingly rapid commercialization of “designer baby” technologies: polygenic embryo screening (especially its use to purportedly screen for traits like intelligence), in vitro gametogenesis (lab-made eggs and sperm), and heritable genome editing (also termed embryo editing or reproductive gene editing). Those three, together with artificial wombs, have been dubbed the “Gattaca stack” by Brian Armstrong, CEO of the cryptocurrency company...
By Lucy Tu, The Guardian | 11.05.2025
Beth Schafer lay in a hospital bed, bracing for the birth of her son. The first contractions rippled through her body before she felt remotely ready. She knew, with a mother’s pit-of-the-stomach intuition, that her baby was not ready either...
By Emily Glazer, Katherine Long, Amy Dockser Marcus, The Wall Street Journal | 11.08.2025
For months, a small company in San Francisco has been pursuing a secretive project: the birth of a genetically engineered baby.
Backed by OpenAI chief executive Sam Altman and his husband, along with Coinbase co-founder and CEO Brian Armstrong, the startup—called...
By Robyn Vinter, The Guardian | 11.09.2025
A man going by the name “Rod Kissme” claims to have “very strong sperm”. It may seem like an eccentric boast for a Facebook profile page, but then this is no mundane corner of the internet. The group where Rod...