{"title":"科学,打断了","authors":"A. McManus","doi":"10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.80","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"During the Second World War, journal editors working under the American Advisory Committee on Scientific Publications (ACSP) struggled to reconcile new demands of secrecy with their commitment to open exchange of knowledge. ACSP referees’ dilemmas were most acute where the consequences of disclosure were least obvious. Their greatest disagreements emerged not out of nuclear weapons research, but rather from problems of lesser perceived military significance, which were nevertheless the subject of contracted work with the Office of Scientific Research and Development. Although civilian scientists could publish on these topics without consequences to national security, the ACSP frequently restricted civilian publications for the simple reason that military-contracted scientists were performing similar research. This paper examines three cases in which the priority claims of federally contracted researchers influenced decisions on censorship. In these cases, referees imposed censorship to ensure equal access to publication channels, when federal contracts had divided the American scientific community into civilian and military-adjacent subgroups. Uniform censorship preserved the image of a uniform scientific community.","PeriodicalId":56130,"journal":{"name":"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences","volume":"105 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2022-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Science, Interrupted\",\"authors\":\"A. McManus\",\"doi\":\"10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.80\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"During the Second World War, journal editors working under the American Advisory Committee on Scientific Publications (ACSP) struggled to reconcile new demands of secrecy with their commitment to open exchange of knowledge. ACSP referees’ dilemmas were most acute where the consequences of disclosure were least obvious. Their greatest disagreements emerged not out of nuclear weapons research, but rather from problems of lesser perceived military significance, which were nevertheless the subject of contracted work with the Office of Scientific Research and Development. Although civilian scientists could publish on these topics without consequences to national security, the ACSP frequently restricted civilian publications for the simple reason that military-contracted scientists were performing similar research. This paper examines three cases in which the priority claims of federally contracted researchers influenced decisions on censorship. In these cases, referees imposed censorship to ensure equal access to publication channels, when federal contracts had divided the American scientific community into civilian and military-adjacent subgroups. Uniform censorship preserved the image of a uniform scientific community.\",\"PeriodicalId\":56130,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences\",\"volume\":\"105 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.80\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1525/hsns.2022.52.1.80","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
第二次世界大战期间,在美国科学出版物咨询委员会(American Advisory Committee on Scientific Publications, ACSP)领导下工作的期刊编辑们努力调和新的保密要求与他们公开交流知识的承诺。在信息披露的后果最不明显的地方,ACSP审稿人的困境最为严重。他们最大的分歧不是来自核武器的研究,而是来自那些被认为不太重要的军事问题,尽管如此,这些问题仍然是科学研究和发展办公室承包工作的主题。虽然民间科学家可以在不影响国家安全的情况下发表这些主题,但ACSP经常限制民间出版物,原因很简单,即与军方签约的科学家正在进行类似的研究。本文考察了三个案例,其中联邦合同研究人员的优先权要求影响审查决定。在这些案例中,当联邦合同将美国科学界划分为民用和邻近军事的小组时,裁判施加审查以确保平等地进入出版渠道。统一的审查制度维护了科学界统一的形象。
During the Second World War, journal editors working under the American Advisory Committee on Scientific Publications (ACSP) struggled to reconcile new demands of secrecy with their commitment to open exchange of knowledge. ACSP referees’ dilemmas were most acute where the consequences of disclosure were least obvious. Their greatest disagreements emerged not out of nuclear weapons research, but rather from problems of lesser perceived military significance, which were nevertheless the subject of contracted work with the Office of Scientific Research and Development. Although civilian scientists could publish on these topics without consequences to national security, the ACSP frequently restricted civilian publications for the simple reason that military-contracted scientists were performing similar research. This paper examines three cases in which the priority claims of federally contracted researchers influenced decisions on censorship. In these cases, referees imposed censorship to ensure equal access to publication channels, when federal contracts had divided the American scientific community into civilian and military-adjacent subgroups. Uniform censorship preserved the image of a uniform scientific community.
期刊介绍:
Explore the fascinating world of Historical Studies in the Natural Sciences, a journal that reveals the history of science as it has developed since the 18th century. HSNS offers in-depth articles on a wide range of scientific fields, their social and cultural histories and supporting institutions, including astronomy, geology, physics, genetics, natural history, chemistry, meteorology, and molecular biology. Widely regarded as a leading journal in the historiography of science and technology, HSNS increased its publication to five times per year in 2012 to expand its roster of pioneering articles and notable reviews by the most influential writers in the field.