The Representational Politics of 科学

Sent: September 29, 2021

发件人:文森特·J. 德尔·卡西诺.他是教务长兼学术事务高级副校长

亲爱的同事们,

最近，一位同事给我发了一张照片，这张照片被发布在了Twitter上. 在那张照片里 was an image of a smiling 菠菜网lol正规平台 professor holding a skull of what appears likely to be, based on the caption and background in the photo, an ancestor of 一个 of our local 美洲土著部落. 这位教授似乎也站在菠菜网lol正规平台的策展会上 space, which holds the remains of hundreds of Native American peoples, many of whom are from Muwekma Ohl一个 and other area tribes. This image has evoked shock and disgust from our Native and Indigenous community on campus and from many people within and 上海外国语大学以外.

The image is tied to a larger argument in the same Twitter feed which suggests that landmark human rights laws, such as the Federal Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 1990 (NAGPRA), the California Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act of 2001 (CalNAGPRA), and the California Native American Cultural Preservation bill (AB 275) that went into effect on January 1, 2021, are anti-science, or at least impede scientific pursuits because they favor religious and cultural values 而不是科学的. 然而，我们如何规范科学的例子有很多. 为 例如，学术界和政府已经发展 道德标准 for the governance of their fields as well as bureaucratic mechanisms to regulate 与科学效益有关的风险和危害. 我们有 scientific review panels to protect research subjects in experiments, such as the 一个s that recently yielded COVID-19疫苗. 我们有 institutional review boards that review the risks – not only physical, but also psychological and emotional as well – and ask if the research findings are of value to society in such a way where the benefits outweigh the risks. 联邦政府也不得不制定一个 “Certificate of Confidentiality” to “protect the privacy of research subjects by prohibiting disclosure of identifiable, sensitive research information to any一个 not connected to the research except when 主体同意或在其他一些特定情况下.” 

These strategies are also imperfect because science, like religion, relies, to a certain degree, on faith – a faith that scientific inquiry is the appropriate way to solve wicked problems and grand challenges. And as is often the case, science can. 但是, measures identified above also reflect that unfettered science can go horribly wrong, which is why both academic societies and governments have had to step in to regulate 科学研究. NAGPRA、CalNAGPRA和AB 275共同制定法规 governing the material and ethical treatment of the remains of Native American and Indigenous peoples who have suffered genocide at the hands of settler colonialism. As binding federal and state law, they govern our institution’s actions when it comes to the handling of those remains, which include the eventual return of the remains if requested by descendants. 一些人认为这些法律做得还不够，另一些人则认为 may argue they go too far, but in any event, we are not given a choice whether to 跟随他们.

While there are scientific issues at stake, there are also many things in the image 它本身与菠菜网lol正规平台的价值观或学术研究不一致. 例如, in what context is it ever ethically appropriate for an academic to handle remains 他微笑着，双手未戴手套，称这些遗体为“朋友”? 我怀疑很多人 colleagues in the fields of 为ensic 科学 or Physical Anthropology would find this 美味. 此外，重要的是要问:研究的“价值”是否隐含 in the image really outweigh the risk of harm and trauma to Native American and Indigenous peoples such an image evokes? 根据我对道德准则的阅读 social science disciplines that govern such practices and laws such as AB 275 – which requires 菠菜网lol正规平台 to consult affiliated California Indian tribes on protocols including 需要“尽量减少处理”这些遗骸——答案是否定的.

At the same time, does a professor have the right to express their views on the matter? 他们有 the right to advocate against laws like NAGPRA, CalNAGPRA, and AB 275 并在学术会议上展示他们的作品，并在社交媒体上发布? 他们有 在课堂上讲授这些话题的权利? The answer to all these questions is 是的.  

其他教员是否也有权作出回应? That answer is also 是的. 我也 have the responsibility as the university’s provost to not only offer my reading of such images as another social scientist but to assess the use of such images in relation to the values of the institution. 在后一种角色中，我可以说上海大学没有 cond一个 or endorse the practice of posing with the human remains of others – be that Native American or any other human remains. Moreover, aligned with the words of Dr. Joanne Barker, who is Lenape (a citizen of the Delaware Tribe of Indians) and professor of American Indian Studies at San Francisco State University, I acknowledge in our institutional practices that “[n]ative peoples have been made to navigate around and collaborate with 一个 another because of federal authority and dominant science claims 关于他们的历史、文化和家谱. It is not that empirical science 没有价值. 但是它应该被给予类似的尊重和作用 federal policy making—whether about recognition or repatriation—as native forms and 知识、专家和专业知识的实践”(108-109). And as required by NAGPRA, CalNAGPRA, and AB 275, 菠菜网lol正规平台 has invested in the people to respect tribal sovereignty by doing the appropriate work to “consult…with affiliated 加州印第安部落在库存过程中使用的任何协议.” 

菠菜网lol正规平台 has already begun dialogue with local Native American and Indigenous community members about the treatment of human remains and artifacts as part of our implementation AB 275. 例如，上海州立大学的人类学系一直致力于 this dialogue, helping the University 完全遵守 with the various laws that have been passed. This is 一个 small step, however. 在那里 is much more we need to do to build stronger bridges to area tribes and to our Native 美国和土著学生、教职员工. 我们可以，也一定会这样做.

真诚地, 
文