Raymond Pearl: on the frontier in the 1920's. Raymond Pearl memorial lecture, 1983.

S. Kingsland

1984-02-01

Abstract:Raymond Pearls career in statistical and human biology illustrates the individualistic optimistic and exuberant style of a frontier in biology during the decade of the 1920s. Pearl introduced statistical biology to the US in the early 20th century. His reputation as a geneticist and statistician earned his appointment to the Johns Hopkins School of Hygiene in 1918. During the 1920s Pearl set out to develop a broad program of biological research covering studies on longevity senescence disease and population growth. Pearls program was funded by the Rockefeller Foundation and initially enjoyed considerable success. Pearls career as a human biologist was shaped by the characteristic features of new fields. 1 feature is the lack of rigorous standards as new methods are tried and new problems explored. The absence of standards offers a relative increase in individual freedom allowing individuals to exert unusually large influence on the development of a field. This freedom had a positive and negative aspect. It allowed Pearl the scope to cover a wide range of problems. His energy and enthusiasm in dealing with these problems probed to be a source of inspiration to young biologists who were starting to learn statistical techniques. Yet Pearls crusading style provoked his rival E.B. Wilson an action responsible for Pearls downfall. Wilson felt that the propagandistic elements of Pearls style were unbecoming to a scientist. Pearl clearly sensed that in a frontier science this style could pay off. It helps to state ones ideas loudly in trying to attract funds particularly when those in control of the money are not themselves scientists and when there are few outside experts who can be called upon to judge the merits of a proposal. Through his informal relationship with E.R. Embree he was successful in winning the Rockefeller Foundation money and freedom to pursue those research problems that most interested him. Pearl was childlike in his enthusiasms his optimism his visions of path breaking projects and in his egocentric inability to conceive that some people might resent being expected to follow his lead. Pearl saw himself as a fighter against a smug and narrow orthodoxy in biology not realizing that he was himself the upholder of a style that would soon fall into disfavor. Pearlsonian science would be perceived as naively positivistic and Pearls holistic conception of biological problems would yield to the reductionist approach exemplified in molecular biology. Pearls broad intellectual outlook would be insufficiently focused in an era of increasing specialization.