The fall of Francisco Ayala, biologist

25 june

In our egalitarian days it is easy to assume that dynasties are things of the past, remaining in the governments of weird countries like England, The Netherlands or the USA. Yet if you practice a traditional martial art, after a while you will know that the lineage of your teacher is a relevant part of your identity as a martial artist. As soon as you understand a bit more, it is neither weird. As the name says it, a martial art is a particular interpretation of martial knowledge, where the teacher carries views given to her by her own teachers. Lineage does matter.

Just like in science.

In science, if you get to think about it, lineages are weird indeed. Science is rationality’s ultimate castle, where should not be any space for personal styles or arts (whatever art might mean). And then again… there is, and plenty of it. Perhaps because there are so many possible questions, already to choose some and dedicate your life to them, is a choice greatly determined by your teachers. Perhaps, even if very few scientists recognize it, there are also styles in science, and schools of thoughts. Groups that can not be fully defended in rational terms, but that exist all the same.

Whether I like it or not, I also belong to one of those.

Let it be said that my claim to a family of evolutionary biology is a tenuous once, since I stopped doing any original research already two decades ago. All the same, the persons that taught me the principles of evolution did not fall from the blue sky, but belonged to a prestigious lineage, one started with the founder of the Modern Synthesis Theodosious Dobzhansky, and continued with his student, Francisco Ayala. A former Dominican priest, he also wrote on philosophy and was frequently called “the renaissance man of evolution”. Ayala received many awards in his long and productive career, and taught and influenced my own professors. As a student of Dobzhansky, Ayala build a prestigious research group in the University of California, who solidly and perhaps boringly, along many decades, build strong studies that fortified the hypothesis posed in that (not anymore) Modern Synthesis of his own teacher.

I even met Francisco Ayala once.

He was passing by Venezuela and visiting his students, so a small discussion on philosophy was organized. Ayala clearly exposed and then defended the classical Popperian view on the evolution of science: Science is objective, it advances by rationally checking past results and progresses slowly, but surely. With few friends we had been reading not only Popper, but his main critic Kuhn who posed that science is a rather social process, and then the far reaching Feyerabend, who claimed that in science, actually, “anything goes”, that there is no way to guarantee that rationality will make knowledge advance. So with no little trepidation, I actually raised my hand, and asked Ayala how he dealt with those criticisms. After all, they were rationally founded, yet they point to the irrationality of science. How could we trust the Popperian view, I asked.

Ayala, the scion of a rich spanish family, was impeccably dressed, way better than any of our professors. A linen jacket cut by an angel, a panama hat, and two toned shoes. He looked at me, and smiled. He asked if I was convinced by the arguments of Feyerabend. I believe I mumbled some weak affirmation. His smile broaden, and then he asked me again: if that is so, what are you doing here? why don’t you go to play tennis? Shall we go and play tennis? Anything goes, right?

His answer made me think for many years after. I suppose that only because of that, it was a good answer. After all is being said, the role of a science teacher is to make his students think. And then again, he didn’t really answered me. From his high seat, he allowed himself a little fun with that student, and he certainly amused the audience, who kindly smiling at my silly question, also clearly understood that probably Ayala played tennis every morning, and that silly modern philosophers, and the sillier students that read them, were wasting theirs, and his time. When I look at that interaction, I understand better what it means to be privileged, and use the privilege to win an audience.

So then, I can’t be really sure if my lack of surprise at the fall of Ayala is rational and clean, or is simply a fulfilled petty wish of revenge, so many years after. You see, two years ago Ayala renounced his professorship in the University of California, since a commission studied several claims of sexual harrasment against him, and found them grounded. And few days ago, following the end of another of such studies, the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, probably the most prestigious assembly of scientists ever, expelled him.

I am troubled by it. I recognize now that his dismissive answer was just how privileged people rejects any challenge, and get away with it. It is neither hard to imagine that from such attitude, he insulted and harassed female collega’s, probably without even realizing it. And yet his scientific achievements are solid and important. He did not revolutioned anything, as his teacher did, but contributed to make evolutionary biology a reasonably body of knowledge. Even if his positions were conservative, that conservationist played an important role in creating the knowledge that today, among other things, allowed us to create a vaccine against COVID19 in months.

What if that great and beautiful and useful achievement of humankind, scientific knowledge, is all build by assholes like Francisco Ayala?