The controversy between Pasteur and Pouchet on spontaneous generation (1859–1864) has received great interest in the sociology of scientific knowledge. This paper shows that some statements were shifted by Pennetier's biased version (1907). The study of the correspondence between Pouchet and the members of the Academie des Sciences reveals that Pouchet was on intimate terms with many members of this institution, and also that the two commissions appointed in 1862 and 1864 did not collude with any Pastorian lobby. The discovery of Pouchet's forgery leads to a quite different estimate of this controversy. Pouchet's defeat can be explained by his repeated retreats in front of the commissions, his dogmatic faith in heterogeny, lobbying by the press, and an immoderate need for glory. Beyond the lack of replies to the rationale against heterogeny, such a transgression of the norms of scientific ethos seems to have been a source of irritation among the Academicians.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dominique Raynaud (1999) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: