412 J.-A. PEMBERTON
intellectual was not to be included among the titular adjectives that the
American and British delegations would ultimately endorse in relation to
the planned educational and cultural organisation.^257
As a group, scientists were better organised than those engaged in
other scholarly pursuits at the time. Throughout 1945, they lobbied
at both a national and international level for science to be accorded a
prominent place in the educational and cultural organisation of the
United Nations. As part of this effort, they sought to ensure that the
word science was included in its title. With this end in view, they lobbied
for the word science to be included in the title of this new organisation.
Very active on these related lobbying fronts were two British scientists:
the evolutionary biologist Julian Huxley and the biochemist Joseph
Needham. Both of these men had long been prominent figures in Social
Relations of Science, this being a movement which emphasised the social
functions of science and the social responsibilities of scientists.^258
Needham had spent much of the war in China. In February 1943,
he went to China to head the Sino-British Science Cooperation Office,
a newly established office which ‘Whitehall had decided was to be offi-
cially attached to the British embassy in Chongqing,’ and to represent
the British Royal Society. Needham’s role in China was that of aiding
that war-torn country in its scientific development and renewing and
extending cultural relations between Britian and China.^259 In February
1945, Needham visited Washington where he was asked about the pos-
sibility of enlisting the support of the International Science Cooperation
Service, the creation of which he had announced in July 1944, for the
(^257) Sewell, UNESCO and World Politics, 77.
(^258) Ibid., 78–9. See also Huxley, ‘Science and the United Nation,’ 553–56; R. Baker,
‘Julian Sorell Huxley: 22 June 1887–14 February 1975,’ Biographical Memoirs of Fellows
of the Royal Society 22 (November 1976): 206–38, 227; and Aant Elzinga, ‘UNESCO and
the Politics of International Cooperation in the Realm of Science,’ in Patrick Petitjean,
ed., Colonial Science: Researchers and Institutions, 20th Century Sciences: Beyond the
Metropolis, vol. 2 (Paris: Ostrom, 1996), 163. For the Social Relations of Science move-
ment, see Robert E. Filner, ‘The Roots of Political Activism in British Science,’ Bulletin of
the Atomic Scientists 32, no. 1 (1976): 25–9, 25.
(^259) Simon Winchester, The Man Who Loved China (New York: Harper Perennial,
209), 54, and Gail Archibald, ‘How the “S” Came to Be in UNESCO,’ in Patrick
Petitjean, Vladimir Zharov, Gisbert Glaser, Jacques Richardson, Bruno de Padirac, and
Gail Archibald, eds., Sixty Years of Science at UNESCO 1945– 2005 (Paris: UNESCO,
2006), 37, 45.