You do not currently have permission to view the full text for this document. Please sign in to an account with an active subscription or contact support.
Returning to Bob Young's opus is a strange experience for those of us who knew him and worked with him: evoking memories, ghosts, and assorted emotions. Focusing on Bob's article ‘Science is social relations’, which evolved from a talk given at the BSSRS (British Society for Social Responsibility in Science) conference - Is there a socialist science?- held in February 1975, to the essay which was published in Radical Science Journal No. 5 in 1977, proved to be particularly evocative in countless ways. Gary Werskey's description of this essay as ‘possibly his [Bob's] most outrageous piece of writing’ (2007: 438) gave returning to this essay a further edge.
Taking a cue from Werskey's (2007) appraisal, Bob's distinctive mode of writing in that piece merits attention. Bob himself commented about this - telling readers that the article was experimental and there are a number of interjections that form a metacommentary on his uncertainty about his mode of communication. He pronounced that the article was in style ‘sometimes weird’ (Young, 1977: 66). It certainly was very different in mode and presentation from his preceding publications in the history of science (his book- Mind, Brain and Adaptation (1970)- and his earlier articles). This publication was distinctive not just in the avoidance of what had become his characteristically ‘long, discursive’ (p. 67) footnotes - a feature which he foregrounds. Reading this essay, it is striking to find how adept Bob was at coining distinctive slogans and aphorisms. Indeed, perhaps he missed his opportunity to produce a distinctive range of commodities - particularly t-shirts (of a kind which he himself might have modelled). There are many of these aphorisms and slogans, but each is distinctive and merits consideration. They begin with the title: Science is social relations.
There follows a long list of others: ‘Science is not value neutral’, ‘Science is ideological’ (p. 69)