Who Was Allowed to Know? Class, Race, and Access

WHO COULD BECOME A SCIENTIST (1600-1850)?

REQUIRED RESOURCES: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 1. EDUCATION │ │ • Grammar school (costly) │ │ • University (very costly) │ │ • Classical languages (Latin, Greek) │ │ • Mathematics tutoring (expensive) │ │ ↓ │ │ Cost: Multiple years of family │ │ income for working class │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 2. LEISURE TIME │ │ • Science was unpaid (until ~1850) │ │ • Needed independent income │ │ • Or wealthy patron │ │ ↓ │ │ Result: Only wealthy could afford │ │ to spend years on research │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

┌──────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 3. EQUIPMENT/MATERIALS │ │ • Books (expensive—hand-copied or │ │ early printed books cost months │ │ of wages) │ │ • Instruments (telescopes, microscopes│ │ = luxury items) │ │ • Laboratory supplies │ │ ↓ │ │ Cost: Often more than annual income │ │ for working person │ └──────────────────────────────────────────┘

┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ 4. SOCIAL ACCESS │ │ • Royal Society, academies = members │ │ only │ │ • Membership required social status │ │ • Connections through family/class │ │ ↓ │ │ Result: Elite networks, closed to │ │ lower classes │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

WHO THIS EXCLUDED: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ ✗ Workers (no time, education, money) │ │ ✗ Artisans (practical skills, no theory│ │ education) │ │ ✗ Farmers (no access to education) │ │ ✗ Servants (no resources whatsoever) │ │ ✗ Poor (obviously) │ │ │ │ = ~95% of population excluded │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

RARE WORKING-CLASS SCIENTISTS (1600-1850)

MICHAEL FARADAY (1791-1867): ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Background: Son of blacksmith, minimal │ │ formal education │ │ ↓ │ │ Apprenticed as bookbinder age 14 │ │ ↓ │ │ Self-taught by reading books he was │ │ binding │ │ ↓ │ │ Attended public lectures (Humphry Davy) │ │ ↓ │ │ Sent Davy detailed notes from lectures │ │ ↓ │ │ Davy hired him as assistant (1813) │ │ ↓ │ │ Became one of greatest experimental │ │ physicists ever │ │ (Discovered electromagnetic induction, │ │ benzene, basis of electric motor) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

WHY FARADAY'S CASE MATTERS: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ • Exceptional talent │ │ • Extraordinary luck (Davy noticed him) │ │ • Access through patronage (Davy) │ │ • Still faced class barriers entire life│ │ (Couldn't become university professor—│ │ lacked university degree) │ │ • Never fully accepted by elite │ │ scientific society (working-class │ │ accent, manners marked him) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

WHAT THIS TELLS US: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Faraday succeeded DESPITE the system, │ │ not because of it │ │ ↓ │ │ Required: │ │ • Genius-level talent │ │ • Incredible luck │ │ • Patron willing to overlook class │ │ • Extraordinary work ethic │ │ ↓ │ │ How many other Faradays existed but │ │ lacked the luck? │ │ ↓ │ │ HOW MUCH TALENT WAS LOST? │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

WHY SCIENTIFIC WORKS WERE IN LATIN (1500-1800)

OFFICIAL JUSTIFICATIONS: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ • "Universal language" - scholars across│ │ Europe could read it │ │ • Precision - Latin technical vocabulary│ │ • Tradition - scholars always used Latin│ │ • Prestige - marks serious scholarship │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

ACTUAL EFFECT: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ EXCLUDED: │ │ • Working class (no Latin education) │ │ • Women (mostly barred from Latin │ │ schools) │ │ • Merchants/craftsmen (practical │ │ education, not classical) │ │ • Anyone outside elite educational │ │ system │ │ ↓ │ │ Latin = CLASS BARRIER disguised as │ │ scholarly necessity │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

WHEN VERNACULAR SCIENCE EMERGED: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Some works published in vernacular: │ │ • Galileo's Dialogue (1632) - Italian │ │ • Descartes' Discourse (1637) - French│ │ • Newton's Opticks (1704) - English │ │ (but Principia stayed Latin) │ │ ↓ │ │ Church/academics criticized this as │ │ "vulgar" and "lowering standards" │ │ ↓ │ │ Real concern: Making knowledge │ │ accessible to non-elites │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

GRADUAL SHIFT (1700-1900): ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ • Scientific papers slowly shift to │ │ vernacular languages │ │ • Latin remains in taxonomy, medicine │ │ (binomial nomenclature, anatomical │ │ terms—still today) │ │ • By 1850: Mostly vernacular │ │ • By 1900: Latin nearly extinct in │ │ science │ │ ↓ │ │ Why the shift? │ │ • Growing middle class │ │ • Demand for accessible knowledge │ │ • Practical applications need wider │ │ audience │ │ • Democracy/education expansion │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

RACISM IN SCIENTIFIC INSTITUTIONS (1700-1950)

FORMAL EXCLUSIONS: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ UNIVERSITIES: │ │ • U.S. universities: Blacks barred until│ │ post-Civil War (1865+) │ │ • Even then: Segregated, limited access │ │ • First Black PhD in science (U.S.): │ │ Edward Bouchet, physics, Yale, 1876 │ │ • First Black woman PhD (U.S.): │ │ Marie Daly, chemistry, Columbia, 1947 │ │ ↓ │ │ LEARNED SOCIETIES: │ │ • Royal Society: Informally whites-only │ │ until 20th century │ │ • U.S. scientific societies: Explicitly │ │ or implicitly whites-only │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

SCIENTIFIC RACISM AS BARRIER: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ "Scientific" claims used to justify │ │ exclusion: │ │ ↓ │ │ • Cranial measurements (phrenology) - │ │ "proved" white superiority │ │ • Intelligence testing - designed to │ │ "prove" racial hierarchies │ │ • Social Darwinism - "natural" racial │ │ inequality │ │ ↓ │ │ These weren't fringe—mainstream science │ │ promoted them (1850-1950) │ │ ↓ │ │ Result: "Science proves non-whites │ │ can't do science" │ │ (Circular, self-serving) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

COLONIAL CONTEXT: ┌──────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Colonized peoples excluded from: │ │ • Universities in colonies (European- │ │ only, or severe restrictions) │ │ • Research positions │ │ • Scientific publications │ │ • Credit for their own knowledge │ │ (See: Colonial Science theft, Core #14)│ └──────────────────────────────────────────┘

EXAMPLES OF RACIAL EXCLUSION

ERNEST EVERETT JUST (1883-1941): ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ African American marine biologist │ │ ↓ │ │ PhD from University of Chicago (1916) │ │ ↓ │ │ Pioneering work on fertilization, │ │ embryology │ │ ↓ │ │ BUT: │ │ • Couldn't get research position at │ │ white universities │ │ • Taught at Howard University (HBCU) │ │ with heavy teaching load │ │ • Limited lab resources │ │ • Had to do major research in Europe │ │ (fled American racism) │ │ • Work underappreciated during lifetime │ │ ↓ │ │ Died at 58, bitter about American │ │ scientific racism │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

PERCY LAVON JULIAN (1899-1975): ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ African American chemist │ │ ↓ │ │ Developed synthesis of cortisone, │ │ physostigmine (glaucoma treatment) │ │ ↓ │ │ BUT: │ │ • Denied faculty positions at white │ │ universities │ │ • Had to work in industry, not academia │ │ • Faced violent racism (home bombed │ │ twice after moving to white suburb) │ │ • Still achieved massive success │ │ (130+ patents) │ │ ↓ │ │ Imagine what he could have done with │ │ proper institutional support │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

RELIGIOUS TESTS FOR UNIVERSITY/SCIENCE ACCESS

ENGLAND (Until 1871): ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Oxford and Cambridge: │ │ ↓ │ │ Required: │ │ • Membership in Church of England │ │ • Oath of allegiance to monarch as head │ │ of Church │ │ • Subscription to 39 Articles of │ │ Anglican faith │ │ ↓ │ │ EXCLUDED: │ │ • Catholics │ │ • Jews │ │ • Nonconformists (Quakers, Baptists, │ │ Methodists, etc.) │ │ • Atheists │ │ ↓ │ │ Not repealed until 1871 (Universities │ │ Tests Act) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

CONTINENTAL EUROPE: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Varied by region: │ │ • Catholic countries: Catholics only │ │ (or severe restrictions on others) │ │ • Protestant regions: Protestants │ │ preferred │ │ • Jews widely excluded (ghettos, │ │ restrictions on professions) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

IMPACT: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Talented people excluded based on │ │ religion, not ability │ │ ↓ │ │ Examples: │ │ • Michael Faraday: Sandemanian │ │ (Christian sect) - excluded from │ │ Cambridge │ │ • Many Jewish scientists: Excluded from │ │ universities, worked privately or │ │ emigrated │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

HOW DISABILITY EXCLUDED PEOPLE FROM SCIENCE

PHYSICAL BARRIERS: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ • Buildings not accessible (stairs, │ │ narrow doors) │ │ • No accommodations for mobility │ │ impairments │ │ • Laboratories designed for able-bodied │ │ • Field work assumed physical ability │ │ ↓ │ │ Result: Physically disabled largely │ │ unable to participate │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

SENSORY BARRIERS: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ BLIND/VISUAL IMPAIRMENT: │ │ • Can't read printed texts (no braille │ │ scientific texts until 1900s) │ │ • Can't use microscopes, telescopes │ │ • Assumed incompatible with science │ │ ↓ │ │ DEAF/HEARING IMPAIRMENT: │ │ • Lectures inaccessible │ │ • No sign language interpretation │ │ • Oral examinations required │ │ ↓ │ │ Result: Sensory disabilities = excluded │ │ (with rare exceptions) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

COGNITIVE/MENTAL HEALTH: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ • Mental illness stigmatized │ │ • Neurodivergence not understood │ │ • "Madness" = disqualification │ │ ↓ │ │ Result: Anyone with mental health │ │ issues or non-normative cognition hidden│ │ or excluded │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

EXCEPTIONS (Proving Barriers Existed): ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ JOHN DALTON: │ │ • Color blind │ │ • Studied his own color blindness │ │ • But: Disability was "mild" enough to │ │ work around │ │ ↓ │ │ STEPHEN HAWKING (Modern): │ │ • ALS, wheelchair, computerized speech │ │ • Succeeded because: │ │ - Already established when disabled │ │ - Technology available (late 20th C) │ │ - Support systems │ │ ↓ │ │ Most disabled people: No such support │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

INTERSECTIONALITY OF EXCLUSION

ONE BARRIER = HARD: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Working class white man: │ │ • Class barrier (education, resources) │ │ • But: Could theoretically overcome │ │ with extraordinary effort/luck │ │ (like Faraday) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

TWO BARRIERS = VERY HARD: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Working class white woman: │ │ • Class barrier (education, resources) │ │ • Gender barrier (universities, │ │ societies, credit) │ │ • Probability of success: Nearly zero │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

THREE+ BARRIERS = NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Poor Black woman: │ │ • Class barrier │ │ • Race barrier │ │ • Gender barrier │ │ ↓ │ │ Probability of becoming scientist │ │ (1600-1900): Effectively zero │ │ ↓ │ │ First Black woman to earn science PhD │ │ in U.S.: Marie Daly, 1947 │ │ (That's how long it took to overcome │ │ these barriers) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

ADD DISABILITY: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Poor Black disabled woman: │ │ • Class + Race + Gender + Disability │ │ ↓ │ │ Effectively impossible until very │ │ recently (2000s) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

SCIENTISTS BY DEMOGRAPHIC (1600-1900)

CLASS: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Upper class/Aristocracy: ~40% │ │ Middle class (professional): ~55% │ │ Working class: ~5% │ │ ↓ │ │ (Working class = 85%+ of population) │ │ (But only 5% of scientists) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

GENDER: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Men: ~99% │ │ Women: ~1% │ │ ↓ │ │ (Women = 50% of population) │ │ (But only 1% of scientists) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

RACE (Europe/U.S.): ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ White: ~99%+ │ │ Non-white: <1% │ │ ↓ │ │ (Even in diverse colonies, only whites │ │ credited as scientists) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

RELIGION (England, example): ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Anglican: ~80% │ │ Other Protestant: ~15% │ │ Catholic: ~3% │ │ Jewish: ~2% │ │ Other/None: <1% │ │ ↓ │ │ (Reflects university religious tests) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

DISABILITY: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Able-bodied: ~99%+ │ │ Disabled: <1% (and usually hidden) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

SUMMARY: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Typical scientist (1600-1900): │ │ • Upper/middle class │ │ • White │ │ • Male │ │ • Able-bodied │ │ • Anglican/Protestant (in England) │ │ ↓ │ │ This was <1% of total population │ │ ↓ │ │ SCIENCE DREW FROM <1% OF HUMAN TALENT │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

ESTIMATING LOST TALENT

CONSERVATIVE CALCULATION: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ If talent is equally distributed: │ │ ↓ │ │ And science drew from <1% of population:│ │ ↓ │ │ Then 99% of potential scientists were │ │ excluded │ │ ↓ │ │ For every Newton, Faraday, Darwin: │ │ 99 equally talented people never got │ │ the chance │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

WHAT THIS MEANS: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ • Discoveries delayed by decades/ │ │ centuries │ │ • Problems unsolved that could have │ │ been solved │ │ • Perspectives missing (different │ │ backgrounds = different questions) │ │ • Knowledge lost (working-class, │ │ non-white, female perspectives) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

SPECIFIC LOSSES: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ MEDICAL: │ │ • Women's health neglected (male │ │ doctors, no female input) │ │ • Working-class diseases understudied │ │ (elite scientists, elite focus) │ │ ↓ │ │ TECHNOLOGICAL: │ │ • Practical innovations delayed │ │ (theoretical bias from elite │ │ education) │ │ ↓ │ │ SOCIAL SCIENCES: │ │ • Elite perspectives dominated │ │ • Working-class, non-white voices │ │ missing from sociology, economics │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

GRADUAL OPENING (1800-2000)

1800-1900: CLASS BARRIERS WEAKEN ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ • Public education expands │ │ • Middle class grows │ │ • Some scholarships available │ │ • Professionalization (science becomes │ │ paid job) │ │ ↓ │ │ Result: More middle-class scientists │ │ (But still mostly upper/middle) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

1850-1950: GENDER BARRIERS CRACK ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ • Women's colleges founded │ │ • Universities slowly admit women │ │ • Still face discrimination, but legal │ │ access granted │ │ ↓ │ │ Result: ~5-10% women scientists by 1950 │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

1900-1970: RACIAL BARRIERS CHALLENGED ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ • HBCUs (Historically Black Colleges) │ │ produce Black scientists │ │ • Post-WWII: Desegregation begins │ │ • Civil Rights movement │ │ ↓ │ │ Result: Slow increase in non-white │ │ scientists (still underrepresented) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

1970-2000: DISABILITY ACCESS IMPROVES ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ • ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act, │ │ 1990) │ │ • Accessibility requirements │ │ • Assistive technology │ │ ↓ │ │ Result: Some disabled scientists can │ │ participate (still barriers) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

2000-PRESENT: ONGOING STRUGGLE ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Legal barriers mostly gone │ │ BUT: │ │ • Implicit bias persists │ │ • Economic barriers remain (university │ │ costs) │ │ • Underrepresentation continues │ │ • "Leaky pipeline" (people leave STEM) │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

CURRENT SCIENTISTS (U.S., 2020s):

BY GENDER: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ STEM overall: ~35% women │ │ But varies by field: │ │ • Biology: ~50% women │ │ • Chemistry: ~40% women │ │ • Physics: ~20% women │ │ • Computer Science: ~25% women │ │ • Engineering: ~15% women │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

BY RACE/ETHNICITY: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ STEM PhDs: │ │ • White: ~65% │ │ • Asian: ~20% │ │ • Hispanic: ~8% │ │ • Black: ~5% │ │ • Native American: <1% │ │ ↓ │ │ (Compare to U.S. population %s: │ │ White ~60%, Black ~13%, Hispanic ~19%) │ │ ↓ │ │ = Underrepresentation continues │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

BY CLASS (Harder to measure): ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ Scientists disproportionately from: │ │ • Upper-middle and upper class │ │ ↓ │ │ Why? │ │ • University costs │ │ • Unpaid internships/research expected │ │ • Need family support through long │ │ education (PhD = 5-7 years) │ │ ↓ │ │ Working-class students less likely to │ │ pursue/complete STEM PhDs │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

BY DISABILITY: ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐ │ ~15% of population has disability │ │ ~3-5% of scientists have disability │ │ ↓ │ │ Underrepresentation continues │ │ Barriers: Accessibility, bias, │ │ accommodation gaps │ └─────────────────────────────────────────┘