I wrote
back, in all good faith and simplicity, recommending him to go through a
course of comparative anatomy and physiology, and then to study
development. I am sorry to say he was very much displeased, as people
often are with good advice. Notwithstanding this discouraging result, I
venture, as a parting word, to repeat the suggestion, and to say to all
the more or less acute lay and clerical "paper-philosophers"[7] who
venture into the regions of biological controversy--Get a little sound,
thorough, practical, elementary instruction in biology.
[1] See the distinction between the "sciences physiques" and the
"sciences physiologiques" in the "Anatomic Generale," 1801.
[2] "Hydrogeologie," an. x. (1801).
[3] "The term _Biology_, which means exactly what we wish to
express, _the Science of Life_, has often been used, and has of
late become not uncommon, among good writers."--Whewell,
"Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences," vol. i. p. 544 (edition
of 1847).
[4] I think that my friend Professor Allman was the first to draw
attention to it.
[5] Galileo was troubled by a sort of people whom he called "paper
philosophers," because they fancied that the true reading of
nature was to be detected by the collation of texts.
Pages:
137
138
139
140
141
142
143
144
145
146
147
148
149
150
151
152
153
154
155
156
157
158
159
160
161