Talk:Bourgeois pseudoscience

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Bad source on genetics[edit]

The cited article from Kautsky doesn't even mention "genetics" by name, and anyhow Kautsky wasn't a Soviet writer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:642:c481:4640:a9d6:7a9d:f49c:ea97 (talk) 03:51, 29 July 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're correct, and I've removed the claim. Brusquedandelion (talk) 19:48, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Article title/fate[edit]

While it is correct that many sciences were considered incompatible with Marxist ideology, the terms of condemnation differed, and "Bourgeois pseudoscience" was but one of them Other included "reactionary pseudoscience". There are some inaccuracies. For example Lysenko called Mendelian genetics "bourgeois invention" and proposed "Marxist genetics" (i.e., he was not attacking "genetics per se, but the concept of gene. I suggest to think of a better article title. Or maybe even merge it into a much better developed Repression of science in the Soviet Union altogether. - Altenmann >talk 20:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For example Lysenko called Mendelian genetics "bourgeois invention" and proposed "Marxist genetics" (i.e., he was not attacking "genetics per se, but the concept of gene.

I had similar thoughts, but not much time to fix the article, hence my recent edits.

Or maybe even merge it into a much better developed Repression of science in the Soviet Union altogether

I was at first favorable to this idea, but this article already talks about the usage of the term outside the USSR, e.g. in the PRC, and it could surely be expanded to talk about other non-Soviet use even more.
However, I agree that something should be done about this article; it's not great for a number of reasons, some of which you have pointed out. Brusquedandelion (talk) 20:47, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

cz:Buržoazní pavěda has examples from Czechoslovak SSR. - Altenmann >talk 22:35, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]