Prologue

To this point, I have maintained that the distinguishing features of Lashley's science were his opposition to theory and applications and his rhetoric of neutrality, and that these were accompanied by his increasing conviction that intelligence was biologically based and hereditarily determined. These last two chapters will demonstrate that Lashley's trademarks were more than simply coincidental aspects of his neuropsychology. Taken together and placed in their historical context, these characteristic features of Lashley's science comprised a powerful political statement: they made an argument for the social status quo, and against political change, progressive reform, and particularly against racial integration.

How can this be, though, when statements on race, or political views of whatever sort, are nowhere to be found in Lashley's work; when, in fact, his deliberate neutrality precluded any reference of the kind? Why would a scientist cultivate such a studied political neutrality, if his purpose were to address the political problems of his age that troubled him? And how can a historian presume to know what those political problems were, and whether or not the scientist's work meant to address them, if there is no mention of politics of any kind anywhere in the body of that work?

It is true, as we have seen, that there are no explicit political references in Lashley's scientific papers: his public persona seems entirely apolitical.