Carlson, Anton J.

From Philosopedia

Carlson, Anton J. (1875—1956) Carlson was a scientist who signed Humanist Manifesto I. In 1953, he was named Humanist of the Year by the American Humanist Association. A professor of physiology at the University of Chicago, Carlson was known on the campus as “Ajax,” the nickname given him because of his resemblance to the Greek hero who fought his battles without calling on the gods for aid. He denied the existence of a life after death, leaving the Lutheran ministry, and at the age of twenty-nine received fame by establishing that the heartbeat begins with the nerve and then reaches and sets off the heart muscle. He commenced his University of Chicago classes at 7 a.m., and once flunked half of the senior class for failure to pass a surprise examination. One of the world’s leading authorities on the physiology of hunger and on the properties of various foods, he proved the nutritive properties of oleomargarine at a time when oleo was illegally sold unless its coloring was separate from the oleo. This was required in order to distinguish it from creamery products. He also insisted that alcoholics be treated as sick persons rather than delinquents and treated them accordingly. He fought for vivisection, saying, “If man isn’t worth more than a dog, then our efforts to improve man are in error.” Carlson was the 94th president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, and he was an adviser to Herbert Hoover’s U.S. Food Administration program after World War I. Medical history credits him with refuting the theory of Dr. Ivan Pavlov concerning the ebb and flow of gastric juices. Most of Carlson’s research in this connection was done on himself, and he was able to prove to the satisfaction of many noted scientists that gastric juices do not flow according to the stimuli supposed by Pavlov to be responsible. His major books were The Machinery of the Body and The Control of Hunger and Disease. In Science and the Supernatural (1945), Carlson wrote, “Science nurtures inquiry, the supernatural stifles it. . . . The supernatural has no support in science, is incompatible with science, [and] is frequently an active foe of science. It is unnecessary for the good life.” {FUS; HM1; HNS; HNS2}