|
|
|
|
Ill will: The science and politics of AIDS dissent controversy.
Cailean Andrew Todd
Edinburgh University
United Kingdom
This paper considers the growing profile of AIDS dissent stemming from the work of Duesberg and Papadopulos-Eleopulos and widely publicised in the controversy surrounding remarks made by South African president Thabo Mbeki. Although not insignificant, the question of Mbeki’s specific position on this matter is judged to be less instructive than the responses it provoked.
The charges directed against Mbeki reveal common assumptions concerning the nature of scientific knowledge, practice, and progress; as well as the sovereign position often assumed of scientific expertise in contemporary society. Whilst neither seeking to support nor deny the validity of any particular counter-thesis on HIV/AIDS it is first asked whether Mbeki’s stance was a wholly negative one when considered in terms of scientific “best practice“ (where “best practice” is understood to refer to the conditions under which ‘progresses’ is most likely to be made).
In attempting to approach this question no insight is claimed into the particular model of science President Mbeki may hold and, as such, it is not suggested that Mbeki’s policies were motivated by any clearly defined theory of science. Rather, by considering the work of Popper, Lakatos, Kuhn and, in particular, Feyerabend, it is argued that at least one general theory of scientific practice can be said to fall in Mbeki’s favour. However, the paper then goes on to consider the extent to which issues raised by the Mbeki controversy cannot be reduced solely to questions of scientific practice. Thus, we are prompted to situate the previous analysis within a wider range of, sometimes conflicting, social concerns. These themes are then brought together under a final question: in light of what Isaiah Berlin termed the “moral and political immaturity” of absolutism , what would be the necessary characteristics of a ‘mature’ cosmopolitan science?