[2] Jonathan Parry, "The end of the body," in Fragments for a History of the Human Body. Part 2. Zone 4, ed. Michel Feher (New York: Zone Press, 1989), 491-517.

[3] Emily Martin,"The end of the body?,"American Ethnologist 19 (1992), 121-140.

[4] Scott F. Gilbert, Resurrecting the body: Has postmodernism had any effect on biology? Science in Context 8 (1995): 563-577.

[5] George Lakoff and Mark Johnson, Metaphors We Live By (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1980).

[6] Interestingly, the grafts that have the best chance of success are those of brain tissues (and sperm-forming tissue), since these regions are protected from the immune system by extracellular matrices.

[7] Jan Klein, Immunology: The Science of Self-Nonself Discrimination (New York: J. Wiley, 1982).

[8] Donna Haraway, "The biopolitics of postmodern bodies: determinations of self in immune system discourse," differences: a journal of feminist cultural studies 1 (1989): 3-43.

[9] Scott F. Gilbert, "The metaphorical structuring of social perceptions," Soundings 62 (1979),166-186.

[10] Susan Sontag, Illness as Metaphor (New York: Anchor Books, 1979).

[11] The first popular magazine articles on Alzheimer's disease coming out in 1977; the first on AIDS coming in 1981.

[12] Paula A. Treichler, "AIDS, homophobia, and biomedical discourse: An epidemic of signification," Cultural Studies 1 (1987): 263-305; Sander Gilman, "AIDS and syphilis: The iconography of disease," in AIDS: Cultural Analysis, Cultural Activism, ed. Douglas Crimp (Cambridge: MIT Press, 1988), 87-107.

[13] David Baltimore, "The brain of a cell," Science 84, no. 11 (1984): 149-151.

[14] Dorothy Nelkin and M. Susan Lindee, The DNA Mystique: The Gene as a Cultural Icon (New York: W. H. Freeman, 1995).

[15] Oscar Hertwig, The Biological Problem of To-day: Preformation or Epigenesis? The Basis of a Theory of Organic Development, trans. P. Chalmers Mitchell (New York: Macmillan, 1894), 135-136; Alfred I. Tauber, "From Self to the Other," in Metamedical Ethics: The Philosophical Foundation of Bioethics, ed. Michael A. Grodin (Dordrecht: Kluwer Press, 1995); Alfred I. Tauber, The Immune Self: Theory or Metaphor? (Cambridge University Press, New York, 1994); Scott F. Gilbert and Steven Borish, "How Cells Learn: Induction, Competence, and Education within the Body," in Change and Development: Issues of Theory, Method, and Application, ed. K. Ann Reninger and Eric Amsel (Hillsdale, NJ,: Lawrence Erlbaum, 1997).

[16] Scott F. Gilbert, "Adaptive enzymes and the molecularization of embryology," in The History of Molecular Biology, ed. Sahotra Sarkar (Dordrecht: Kluwer Press, 1996); Scott F. Gilbert, John M. Opitz and Rudolf A. Raff, "Reintegrating developmental and evolutionary biology," Developmental Biology 173 (1996): 357-372.

[17] See Tauber, "From Self to the Other"; Gilbert, Opitz and Raff, "Reintegrating developmental and evolutionary biology"; Nils K. Jerne, "The generative grammar of the immune system," EMBO Journal 4 (1985): 847-852; Brian Goodwin, How the Leopard Changed its Spots: The Evolution of Complexity (New York: Scribners, 1994).; Francisco J. Varela and Coutino, Antonio, "Second generation immune networks," Immunology Today 12 (1991): 159-166.

[18] Sandra Harding, Whose Science? Whose Knowledge? Thinking from Women's Lives (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1991).

[19] Stephen Gould has written about science in a similar vein; "Shields of expectation--and actuality," Eight Little Piggies (New York: Norton, 1993), 409-426.

[20] Eugene Marion Klaaren, The Religious Origins of Modern Science (Grand Rapids: W. B. Eerdmans, 1977).

[21] Harding, Whose Science?; and Sandra Harding, (ed.) The "Racial" Economy of Science: Toward a Democratic Future (Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1993)

[22] Sal Restivo, "Modern science as a social problem," Social Problems 35 (1988), 3.

[23] Ernst H. Haeckel, The Riddle of the Universe (New York: Harper, 1902); Madison Grant, The Passing of the Great Race, or The Racial Basis of European History (New York: Scribners, 1916); Karl C. Vogt, Lectures on Man (London: Longman, Green, Longman, and Roberts, 1864). See Stephen J. Gould, The Mismeasure of Man (New York: W. W. Norton, 1981).

[24] Roger V. Short, "Sex determination and differentiation," in Reproduction in Mammals: Embryonic and Fetal Development, ed. Colin R. Austin and Roger V. Short (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), 70. This paragraph and others like it are not to be found in the 1982 revision of this textbook. This example was used in Bonnie Spanier, "The natural sciences: Casting a critical eye on 'objectivity'," in Toward a Balanced Curriculum, ed. Bonnie Spanier, Alexander Bloom and Darlene Boroviak (Cambridge: Schenkman Publishing, 1984), 49-57.

[25] Biology and Gender Study Group, "The importance of feminist critique for contemporary cell biology," Hypatia 3 (1988), 61-76; Emily Martin, "The egg and the sperm: How science has constructed a romance based on stereotypical male-female roles," Signs 16 (1991): 485-501; Meredith F. Small, "Sperm wars: The battle for conception," Discover (July, 1991): 48-53.

[26] Scott F. Gilbert, "Cells in search of community: Critiques of Weismanism and selectable units in ontogeny," Biology and Philosophy 7 (1992): 473-487; Evelyn F. Keller, Secrets of life, Secrets of Death (New York: Routledge, 1992).

[27] See, for instance, quotations of Rabi in John S. Rigden, Rabi: Scientist and Citizen (New York: Basic Books, 1987). On the importance of this idea in the United States, see David A. Hollinger, "Free enterprise and free inquiry: The emergence of laissez-faire communitarianism in the ideology of science in the United States," in Science, Jews, and Secularity: Studies in Mid-Twentieth Century American Intellectual History (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1996).

[28] Alvin Toffler and Heidi Toffler, Creating a New Civilization (Atlanta: Turner Publishing, 1995).

[29] Cinna Lomnitz, Fundamentals of Earthquake Prediction (New York: Wiley, 1993).

[30] Harding, Whose Science?

[31] Thomas H. Huxley, Science and Education (New York: Appleton, 1897).

[32] Everett, quoted in Eric Temple Bell, The Queen of the Sciences (Baltimore: William and Wilkins, 1931), 20.

[33] Oswald Spengler, "The meaning of numbers," in The World of Mathematics, ed. James R. Newman, (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1955), 2315-2347.

[34] Robert N. Proctor, Value-Free Science? (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1991).

[35] See, for example, Ruth Bleier, Gender and Science (New York: Pergamon Press, 1977); Anne Fausto-Sterling, Myths of Gender (New York: Basic Books, 1985).; Donna Haraway, Primate Visions: Gender, Race, and Nature in the World of Modern Science (New York: Routledge, 1989).

[36] Gilbert, "Cells in search of community"; Daniel P. Todes, Darwin Without Malthus: The Struggle for Existence in Russian Evolutionary Thought (New York: Oxford University Press, 1989).

[37] Gilbert Allardyce, "The rise and fall of the Western Civilization course,"American Historical Review 87 (1982): 695-725.

[38] Allardyce, "The rise and fall."

[39] Milledge Louis Bonham, "The War Issues Course," Southern School 1919: 346-347. In Ayedelotte Archives Box 99, Swarthmore College.

[40] Frank Aydellote, Letter to Dr. Morris P. Tilney, University of Michigan, 1921. Ayedelotte Archives Box 99, Swarthmore College.

[41] Frank Aydellote, Letter to Dr. C. R. Mann, War Department Committee on Education, 1918. Ayedelotte Archives Box 99. Swarthmore College.

[42] Confidential letter to Frank Aydellote. Ayedelotte Archives. Swarthmore College.

[43] Gilbert, "Resurrecting the body."

[44] Richard J. Herrnstein and Murray, Charles, The Bell Curve: Intelligence and Class Structure in America (New York: Free Press, 1994).; J. Philippe Rushton, Race, Evolution, and Behavior: A Life History Perspective (New York: Transactions Press, 1994).

[45] Gilbert and Borish, "How cells learn."

[46] Lynn Margulis, Symbiosis in Cell Evolution (San Francisco: W. H. Freeman, 1981); Lewis Thomas, The Lives of a Cell: Notes of a Biology Watcher (New York: Viking Press, 1974).

[47] Haraway, Primate Visions.

[48] Indeed, the television programs starting from Disney Nature programs and continuing through NOVA and Discovery resemble the Moody Bible Institute' s "Sermons from Science" series. So let me end by telling a tale, extrapolating a biological concept into discussions of society and the multicultural curriculum. Homology is a word that comes from comparative anatomy and embryology. Although this word means somewhat different things to different groups of biologists, it generally implies that two or more structures (bones, organs, proteins, nucleic acid sequences) have an underlying similarity despite their obvious differences. For instances, here are three sets of homologous structures: (1) Our index finger and any other finger. (2) Any finger and any toe. (3) The human hand and the bird's wing. So what does one emphasize, the differences between our toes and our fingers or their similarities? Nobody will deny that they're different. Nobody will deny that they're similar. Whether one emphasizes the differences or the similarities between homologous structures is thus a political or aesthetic decision. Does one stress the differences between men and women, between Chinese cultures and Western Cultures, between Serbs and Croats, between feather development and hair development, or does one emphasize their similarities? In this manner, I am homologous to any other person in the world. No person is totally "other", "foreign" or "exotic", nor is any person the same as me. Homology diffuses "the exoticism of the other" while at the same time allowing us to celebrate both our real similarities and our real differences. Homologies need not even serve the same functions (i.e., they are not necessarily analogous). The bones we use for hearing are homologous to the bones fish use for chewing. By being aware of both the differences and the similarities between groups, we can expand the liberal arts repertoire and teach students to recognize what is excellent in a wider cultural context.