Geison

Perutz attacks Geison for having an ideology which denies the very existence of correct explanations of phenomena.

Pasteur's 'Private Science' Summers, William C. 1997

What Geison did say was that Pasteur believed in his interpretation even though he observed differences in optical rotation, and in order to save his hypothesis, he offered a (presumably reasonable) explanation for the difference.

Pasteur's 'Private Science' Summers, William C. 1997

Geison sets this information in the context of the ethics of his time, and in his view, Pasteur comes out wanting.

Pasteur's 'Private Science' Summers, William C. 1997

Geison carefully distinguishes between therapeutic trials on Pasteur's two "private patients," already known to have rabies, and experimental trials such as that on Joseph Meister, for whom the diagnosis was unknown.

Pasteur's 'Private Science' Summers, William C. 1997

Perutz objects to Geison's suggestion that Pasteur slighted his collaborator, Auguste Laurent, and claims that Geison accuses Pasteur of "opportunism."

Pasteur's 'Private Science' Summers, William C. 1997

In my review of Geison's book and my later exchange of letters with Geison I showed these accusations to have been false.

Pasteur's 'Private Science' Summers, William C. 1997

In commenting on Pasteur's vaccination of Meister, Geison writes: "boldly, even recklessly, Pasteur was willing to apply vaccines in the face of ambiguous experimental evidence about their safety and efficiency."

Pasteur's 'Private Science' Summers, William C. 1997

As a historian, however, Geison is rightly concerned with how Pasteur thought about his work; modern chemistry is off limits.

Pasteur's 'Private Science' Summers, William C. 1997

According to Geison, "Pasteur shared with many of his peers a rather simple minded and absolutist notion of scientific truth, rarely conceding the possibility of its being multifaceted and relative."

Pasteur's 'Private Science' Summers, William C. 1997

Perutz writes: "Geison insinuates that Pasteur cheated because the effects on polarized light of his right - and left-handed salts of tartaric acid, which according to Pasteur's interpretation should have been exactly equal and opposite, were in fact slightly different."

Pasteur's 'Private Science' Summers, William C. 1997