Some Reflections on the Protean Nature of the Scientific Precursor

Science citation index, i (1961), p. xv.

Random House dictionary of the English Language (New York, 1968).

Joshua Lederberg Esther , “Replica plating and indirect selection of bacterial mutants”, Journal of bacteriology, lxiii (1952), 399–406, p. 399.

Darwin Charles , Origin of species (6th edition reprinted, New York, 1958). The ‘Historical Sketch’ is a brief survey of those authors and naturalists who espoused a theory of transformism prior to the appearance of the Origin of species. The sketch appears as an introduction to the work.

Ibid., 75.

Ibid., 409.

Oppenheimer Jane , “An embryological enigma in the Origin of species”, in Forerunners of Darwin, ed. by Glass Bentley Temkin Owsei Straus William L. Jr (Baltimore, 1968), 292–322, p. 296.

Glass Bentley , “Maupertuis, pioneer of genetics and evolution”, ibid., 51–83.

This quotation is taken from a review of the book The mathematical papers of Isaac Newton. The review, written by Michael S. Mahoney, appeared in Science, xx (1977), 864–65, p. 865.

Brunet Pierre , Les physicians hollandais et la methode expérimentale en France au XVIIIe siècle (Paris, 1926), 9.

Vernière Paul , Spinoza et la pensée française avant la révolution (Paris, 1954), 529.

Ibid., 553.

Ibid., 554.

Hampshire Stuart , Spinoza (Harmondsworth, Middx, 1973), 79.

Lovejoy Arthur O. , The Great Chain of Being (reprint, New York, 1965), 49.

Ibid., 54.

Ibid., 227.

Kuhn Thomas S. , The structure of scientific revolutions (2nd edn, Chicago, 1970), 167.

Ibid., 138.

Cohen I. B. , Franklin and Newton—an inquiry into speculative Newtonian experimental science (Cambridge, Mass., 1966). See the footnote on p. 10.

Kuhn Thomas S. , op. cit. (ref. 18), 138.

Herodotus , History of the Greek and Persian War, translated by Rawlinson George (New York, 1963), Bk 1, p. 1.

Kuhn T. S. , op. cit. (ref. 18), 137.

Hall A. Rupert , “Can the history of science be history?”, The British journal for the history of science, iv (1969), 207–20, p. 214.

Keele Kenneth D. , William Harvey (London 1965), 119.

I do not mean to imply that the working scientist cannot appreciate the influences of such extra-disciplinary figures on the development of his science; it is just that in the actual application of his energy and time to his science, such precursory influences are considered to be extraneous.

Lovejoy Arthur O. , “Schopenhauer as an evolutionist”, in Glass et alii, Forerunners (ref. 7), 415–37, p. 426.

See Millhauser Milton , Just before Darwin, Robert Chambers and the “Vestiges” (Middletown, 1959), 156.

A discussion of the way that various novelists, poets, and essayists supported the theory of evolution is contained in Just before Darwin (ref. 28)—see especially ch. 6, “To write no more upon the subject”, 141–64.

Temkin Owsei , “The idea of descent in post-romantic German biology: 1848–1858”, in Glass , Forerunners (ref. 7), 323–55, p. 354.

Ibid., 341.

Lovejoy A. O. , “The argument for organic evolution before the Origin of species, 1830–1858”, in Glass , Forerunners (ref. 7), 356–414, p. 356.

Ibid., 360.

Millhauser , op. cit. (ref. 28), 66.

Darwin Charles , op. cit. (ref. 4), 17.

Wilkie J. S. , “The idea of evolution in the writings of Buffon (1)”, Annals of science, xii (1956), 48–62, p. 48.

Wilkie J. S. , “The idea of evolution in the writings of Buffon”, ibid., 48–62, 212–27, 255–66.

Ibid., 263.

This paper by Thomas Huxley is referred to in Lovejoy, op. cit. (ref. 32), 374.

Butterfield H. , The Whig interpretation of history (London, 1931), 11.

Lovejoy Arthur O. , “Buffon and the problem of species”, in Glass , Forerunners (ref. 7), 84–113, p. 91.

Hall A. Rupert , op. cit. (ref. 24), 216.