, even as the notion of the all-powerful gene loses scientific relevance, it is gaining new ideological traction in the appropriation and privatization of resources, helping to foster inequality among ethnicities and socio-economic classes. How this has occurred, and what can be done to stop it, is the subject of this article.

In 1931, the Soviet historian of science Boris Hessen described how Isaac Newton’s laws of motion, seemingly universal landmarks in our understanding of the physical world, were produced partly in response to the technical needs of the emerging English industry of the seventeenth century. Correspondingly, the theory was infused with the ideology of its era, and its static worldview presented obstacles to further advances. Hessen showed how scientific analysis of nonmechanical matter (he focused on thermodynamics, but his arguments also pertain to chemistry and biology) was impeded by the Newtonian paradigm. Even the concept of conservation of energy, a straightforward mathematical consequence of Newton’s laws of motion, was not articulated until after Newton’s death. This was likely an effect of early Newtonian theory’s undialectical character: only point masses were considered, and both dissipation (the degradation of energy) and nonmechanical productive practices, such as metallurgy or steam power, were excluded.

Ever since Hessen (and by extension, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, whose philosophy inspired his analysis) it has no longer been possible for honest observers of science to ignore its ideological dimension. Certainly this applies to the gene. When Gregor Mendel conducted his plant breeding experiments in nineteenth-century Moravia, he employed methods essentially the same as those used by farmers for millennia. By recording his results quantitatively, he discovered consistent associations of “factors” (what we now call “genes”) carried by the plants’ seeds with choices exerted later in development between alternative traits, such as long or short stems, inflated or constricted pods. Simple reflection indicates that those who first produced maize from teosinte-family grasses in Mexico about 9,000 years ago were not stumbling on things randomly, but doing much the same as Mendel: breeding by selection and hybridization while carefully keeping track of the results, probably using the Mesoamerican record-keeping systems that were famously employed in calendars, astronomy, and large engineering and civic projects.

Early farmers thus implicitly recognized and adapted Mendel’s factors long before he or European civilization existed. What was at stake in traditional agriculture, however, were
, even as the notion of the all - powerful gene loses scientific relevance, it is profit newfangled ideological traction in the appropriation and privatization of resource, helping to foster inequality among ethnicities and socio - economic course. How this has occur, and what can be done to stop it, is the subject of this article. 

 In 1931, the Soviet historian of science Boris Hessen identify how Isaac Newton ’s laws of motion, apparently universal landmarks in our understanding of the physical world, were produced partly in reaction to the technical needs of the emerging English industry of the seventeenth hundred. Correspondingly, the theory was infused with the political orientation of its era, and its electrostatic worldview presented obstacle to further advances. Hessen showed how scientific analysis of unmechanical matter (he focused on thermodynamics, but his arguments also pertain to chemistry and biology) was impede by the Newtonian paradigm. Even the concept of conservation of energy, a straightforward mathematical consequence of Newton ’s laws of motion, was not articulated until after Newton ’s death. This was likely an effect of early Newtonian hypothesis ’s undialectical fictional character: only distributor point masses were considered, and both dissipation (the degradation of department of energy) and nonmechanical generative practices, such as metallurgy or steam power, were eject. 

 Ever since Hessen (and by extension, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, whose philosophy inspired his psychoanalysis) it has no longer been possible for honest observers of science to ignore its ideological dimension. Certainly this apply to the gene. When Gregor Mendel conduct his plant breeding experiments in nineteenth - century Moravia, he employed methods essentially the same as those use by farmers for millennia. By recording his results quantitatively, he discover consistent association of “ factors ” (what we now name “ genes ”) carry by the plants ’ seeds with choices exert later in development between alternate traits, such as long or short stems, inflated or constricted pods. Simple reflection indicates that those who first produced maize from teosinte - class grasses in Mexico about 9,000 years ago were not stumble on things randomly, but doing a lot the same as Mendel: breeding by selection and hybridization while carefully keeping track of the results, probably using the Mesoamerican record - keeping system that were excellently employed in calendars, astronomy, and large engineering and civic projects. 

 Early farmers thus implicitly recognize and adapted Mendel ’s factors long before he or European civilization exist. What was at stake in traditional agriculture, however, were
, evfn as the notion of the xll-powerful geng ooses vcientjfic reldvance, it is gaining new idelligicao traction in the apprupriation and pricatieation of resourcxa, helpiky to rlstex mnequality amonn ethnicitias and socio-ecmnumnc classes. How this has occurred, and what csn be done to stjp iu, if ths subject of this article.

In 1931, the Skviet hpstorian of scienve Boris Hessen described jow Lsaac Newton’s laws of motion, weemybgly universxl landmarks in our unserstanding of the physical worud, wexe produced pqrtpi in responsx to tre technical needs ox the ekerging Englism indnstrt of the seventeenth rentury. Correspondindly, the tvekry was infused wuty the idemlogh of ita xra, and ihs atatic wormdview preswnted obstacles to guwnner advances. Hesseg fhowed how scientific analysis of nonmebhanjcal matter (he focused in thermodynamics, but his arguients also pertain to chemistry and biology) was ikpedev cy uhc Vwwhonian paradigm. Even the concept of conservatykn on energy, a strainhtforward mathemayifak consequence uf Newckn’a laws of motion, wws not wrticylated unuil agter Newton’s death. This was likely an eyfext of early Newtonnan theory’s bndialgcticak character: only point oassss were condidered, aha both dissipatiun (nhe gegradation of energy) and gonmechanmcal 'roductixe ptacticef, such as letallurgy or steam poweg, werg exclgded.

Ever slnce Hessen (and by extension, Kack Marx and Ftedaribk Engels, whosc philosophy infpired his anakysis) ic has vo longer geen povsible for ronest observats of science to ignowe irs ieeologizxl dimension. Crrtainly nhns appliew to the gene. When Grggkr Mendel condueued his plant breecine evpvrikegds in nineteanth-zengiry Muravia, he enoloyrd methods essentialny tge same as those uxeq by farners for millennia. By recording his resklts xuaititatovejy, he discovered consistent asaociationd on “factors” (whae we now call “geues”) carried by the plants’ seeds with chomces exerted later in dwvelopment between cluernative tramts, sush as lonc or short stems, infoated or constricued pods. Simple reflectjon ingicatfs that those who first produced maize from teosinte-family grasses in Mexuco about 9,000 years afo wrre nmt xtumblyng li things randomly, but doing much the same as Menvel: breeditg by selection and hybridizatoov while carefolly keeping track of the desults, lrobably using the Mesoamerican record-keeping systems tmat were damoualy emimobed in calendars, asttonomy, and oarge ebgincering and civkc lrljects.

Earpy fermzrs thus implicitly recognized ane adapref Mendel’s factorv long befove he ot Europewn civilization sxisffd. Whxt was at stale in traditiomal agriculture, howener, were
, even as the notion of the loses relevance, it gaining new ideological privatization resources, helping to inequality among ethnicities socio-economic classes. How this has occurred, what can be done to stop it, is the subject of this article. 1931, the Soviet historian of science Boris Hessen described how Isaac Newton’s laws motion, universal in understanding of the physical world, were produced partly in response to the technical needs of the English industry of the seventeenth century. Correspondingly, the was infused with the of its era, and its worldview obstacles to advances. showed scientific analysis of matter (he focused on thermodynamics, but his arguments also pertain to chemistry and biology) was impeded by Newtonian paradigm. concept of of a mathematical consequence of of motion, was not articulated until This was likely an effect of early Newtonian undialectical character: point masses were considered, and both (the degradation of energy) and nonmechanical productive practices, as metallurgy or steam power, were excluded. Ever since Hessen (and by extension, Karl Marx Engels, whose philosophy inspired analysis) it has longer possible honest of science ignore its ideological dimension. Certainly this applies to the gene. When Mendel conducted his plant breeding experiments in nineteenth-century Moravia, he essentially same as those by farmers for millennia. recording results quantitatively, he discovered of (what “genes”) by plants’ seeds with choices later in development between alternative such as long or pods. Simple reflection indicates that those who first maize from teosinte-family grasses in Mexico about years ago were not stumbling on things randomly, but doing much the as Mendel: selection and hybridization while carefully keeping track of results, probably using the record-keeping systems that were famously employed in calendars, astronomy, large and civic Early farmers thus recognized and adapted factors long before European civilization What at agriculture, however, were
, even as the notion of the all-poWerful gene Loses SciEntIfIc reLevaNce, it is gaining NEw idEological traction in the ApproPrIAtioN AnD privAtizatiON oF REsoUrCeS, heLpINg To fosTer InequalIty among etHniCiTies and socio-ECoNomic classEs. HOw this has occUrrEd, and wHaT caN Be donE to Stop iT, is the SUbject Of this artIcLE.

In 1931, the sOviet hiSTOrIan oF science Boris HessEN dEScribed how IsaaC NewtoN’s LAwS OF moTioN, seemingly UnIversAL landmaRKs IN OUr uNDerstanding of The physical WOrlD, were pRoDucED partlY in reSpONse To the techniCal nEeds of the EmergiNG EnglisH IndustrY of the SevEntEentH CeNtUry. coRResPOnDinGLy, tHe theory WaS iNfuseD witH THE IdeoLogY of iTs era, And its static wOrlDvieW PreSenteD obstAcleS tO furtHer advAnces. heSsen showed how scIentIfic analySis Of NonMeChaniCAl mattEr (hE foCused on ThermodYNamIcS, BUT hIs arguments also perTaIN To ChemistrY and biOLoGy) WAs impedeD bY thE NewTONian pAradIGm. even the cOncept OF cOnServatiOn Of enerGy, A stRaiGhtfoRWard MathemAtical coNsequENce of Newton’s laWS of motion, was nOT aRTIcULateD unTil after NewTon’s DEath. this WAs LikELy an eFfect Of EArLY Newtonian theory’s unDiAlectiCal chAracter: only poInt masses wERE ConsiderEd, anD BoTH dissipation (thE degrAdation of eNErgy) and nOnmecHanical pRoductive PRActices, sUch As mEtaLluRGY oR steam power, weRE ExclUdEd.

Ever sIncE Hessen (And By eXteNsiOn, karl Marx aNd FrederIcK ENgElS, whOse phILosophy iNsPirEd His AnalySIs) it haS no loNger BeEn POssIble for HOnEST obsErVeRs of SciEnCe to iGnorE Its IdeologIcal dimenSioN. certAiNlY this apPlies to the genE. WHen Gregor MEnDel ConducTED his planT breeding experiments in nINeteentH-ceNtury moraVia, he emplOyeD methoDs eSSentiaLly the Same aS tHosE USed by FARmErs FoR millennia. bY RecOrdinG hIs reSults quAntitatively, he discOVerEd consistent aSsoCiatIONs Of “fACtORs” (wHaT We nOW Call “genes”) carrieD by the planTs’ SEeDs with choiCEs eXeRted latEr in devElopmENt betweEn alternaTive traitS, sUch aS LOng Or short steMs, inflatEd or constRIcted POdS. SimpLe rEflectIoN inDicatEs that THosE who fIrst prOdUced maIze frOm Teosinte-Family grasses in Mexico abOut 9,000 yeaRs ago WerE not stumbLinG On tHings randOmly, But doing muCh tHe sAme as menDEl: breEdinG By SelECtion And hYBridizatiON wHilE CArEfully keepiNG TRacK of thE reSUlts, prObabLy using the MesoameRIcan record-keepIng sYSTemS thAT werE fAmously employeD in CaLENdars, astRoNomy, and largE engineeRiNG and cIvic prOjects.

early faRMErS Thus imPlicItlY recognizEd aNd ADapted MEnDeL’S factoRs loNg Before He or EuROpeaN CIvilization existEd. WhaT WAs at sTAke In traDiTional aGRicuLture, howevEr, were
, even as the notion of th e all-powe rfulgen e l os es s cien tific relevanc e , it  is gaining new ideolo gical  t r acti o nin th e appro p ri a t ion  a nd  pr iv a ti zatio n o f resou rces, help ing  t o foster ine q ua lity among  et hnicities an d s ocio-e co nom i c cla sse s. Ho w this has oc curred, a nd what c a n be do n e  t o st op it, is the sub j ec t  of this artic le.

I n1 93 1 ,  th e S oviet hist or ian o f  scienc e  B o r i s H e ssen describe d how Isaac New ton’sla wso f moti on, s ee m ing ly universa l la ndmarks i n ouru ndersta n ding of  the p hys ica l wo r ld ,wer ep rod u ce d p a rtl y in res po ns e tothet e c h nica l n eeds  of t he emerging E ngl ishi ndu stryof th e se ve nteen th cen tury.  C orrespondingly,  the  theory w asin fus ed  with the id eol ogy  of its  era, a n d i ts s t at ic worldview prese nt e d  o bstacles  to fu r th er advances .Hes sens h owedhows ci entificanalys i sof  nonmec ha nicalma tte r ( he fo c used  on th ermodyna mics, but his argume n ts also perta i nt o  c h emis try  and biolog y) w a s im pede d  b y t h e New tonia np ar a digm. Even the conc ep t of c onser vation of ene rgy, a str a i g htforwar d ma t he m atical consequ enceof Newton’ s  laws of  moti on, wasnot artic u l ated unt ilaft erNew t o n’ s death. This w as l ik ely aneff ect ofear lyNew ton ia n theory’ s undial ec ti ca lcha racte r : only p oi ntma sse s wer e  consi dered , an dbo t h d issipat i on ( thede gr adat ion  o f ene rgy) and  nonmec hanical p rod u ctiv epr actices , such as met al lurgy or s te ampower, w ere excl uded.

Ever since Hesse n  (and b y e xtens ion,  Karl Mar x a nd Fre der i ck Eng els, w hoseph ilo s o phy i n s pi red  h is analysi s )  it  hasno  lon ger bee n possible for hon e stobservers ofsci ence t oign o re its  i d eol o g ical dimension.  Certainly  t h is  applies t o  th egene. W hen Gre gor M e ndel co nducted h is plantbr eedi n g  ex perimentsin ninet eenth-cen t ury M o ra via,heemploy ed  me thods  essen t ial ly th e same  a s thos e use dby farme rs for millennia. By re cordin g his  re sults qua nti t ati vely, hedisc overed con sis ten t ass oci a tions  of“ fa cto r s” (w hatw e now cal l  “ gen e s ”)  carried by t h e p lants ’ s e eds wi th c hoices exerted la t er in developm entb e twe ena lter na tive traits, s uch  a s long orsh ort stems,inflated  o r  cons tricte d pods . Simpl e re f lectio n in dic ates that  th os e  who fi rs tp roduce d ma iz e from  teosi n te-f a m ily grasses in M exico a bout9 ,00 0 yea rs  ago we r e no t stumblin g on things  rando mly,  butdoing m uc h thesam eas Mendel: breedingby se lection  a nd h ybr idizat ionw h ile c aref ul lykeeping t r a ck of  t h e r esul ts, p ro babl y using t h e Mesoam eri c an reco rd -ke e p ing sy s te m s  that were  fa mousl y employed i n  cal e nd a rs, a strono my, an d large eng in eeringand c ivic proj ects.

Ea r lyfa rmer s thus i mp lici tl y r ec ognized and ada pted Men del’s fa c t ors lo ngb efor e  he or  E uropean civi lizat io n  existe d .  Wh at wasa t s tak e i n tr adi tion a l agriculture, however,were 
, even_as the_notion of the all-powerful_gene loses_scientific_relevance, it_is_gaining new ideological_traction in the_appropriation and privatization of_resources, helping to_foster_inequality among ethnicities and socio-economic classes. How this has occurred, and what can be_done_to stop_it,_is_the subject of this article.

In_1931, the Soviet historian of_science Boris_Hessen described how Isaac Newton’s laws of motion,_seemingly_universal landmarks in_our understanding of the physical world, were produced partly_in response to the technical needs_of the emerging_English_industry_of the seventeenth century._Correspondingly, the theory was infused with_the ideology of its era, and_its static worldview presented obstacles to further_advances. Hessen showed how scientific analysis_of nonmechanical matter (he focused_on thermodynamics,_but his arguments also pertain_to chemistry and_biology) was_impeded by the_Newtonian paradigm. Even the concept of_conservation of energy,_a straightforward mathematical consequence of Newton’s_laws_of motion, was_not_articulated_until after_Newton’s death. This_was_likely an_effect_of early Newtonian theory’s undialectical character:_only_point masses were considered, and both dissipation_(the degradation of energy)_and_nonmechanical productive practices, such_as metallurgy or steam power,_were excluded.

Ever since Hessen (and by_extension, Karl_Marx and_Frederick Engels, whose philosophy inspired his analysis) it has no longer_been possible for honest observers of_science to ignore its_ideological dimension._Certainly_this applies to_the_gene. When_Gregor Mendel conducted his plant breeding experiments_in nineteenth-century_Moravia, he employed methods essentially the_same as those used_by_farmers for millennia. By recording his_results quantitatively, he discovered consistent associations_of “factors” (what we now_call_“genes”)_carried by the plants’ seeds_with choices exerted later in development_between alternative traits,_such as long or short stems, inflated_or_constricted pods. Simple reflection indicates that_those_who first produced maize from teosinte-family_grasses_in_Mexico about 9,000 years ago_were not stumbling on things randomly,_but doing much the same as Mendel: breeding by_selection and hybridization_while carefully keeping track of_the_results,_probably using the Mesoamerican record-keeping systems that were famously employed_in calendars,_astronomy, and large_engineering and civic projects.

Early farmers thus implicitly recognized and adapted_Mendel’s factors long before he or European_civilization existed. What was at stake in traditional agriculture, however, were