Fisher, R.A.
Each generation, perhaps, found in Mendel’s paper only what it expected to find; in the first period a repetition of the hybridization results commonly reported, in the second a discovery in inheritance supposedly difficult to reconcile with continuous evolution. Each generation, therefore, ignored what did not confirm its own expectations. Only a succession of publications, the progressive building up of a corpus of scientific work, and the continuous iteration of all new opinions seem sufficient to bring a new discovery into general recognition.
Each generation, perhaps, found in Mendel’s paper only what it expected to find; in the first period a repetition of the hybridization results commonly reported, in the second a discovery in inheritance supposedly difficult to reconcile with continuous evolution. Each generation, therefore, ignored what did not confirm its own expectations. Only a succession of publications, the progressive building up of a corpus of scientific work, and the continuous iteration of all new opinions seem sufficient to bring a new discovery into general recognition.
‘Has Mendel’s work been rediscovered?’ reprinted from Annals of Science 1 (1936) 115—137 in Experiments in Plant Hybridization by G. Mendel, English translation of Mendel’s original paper, edited by J.H. Bennett (Oliver and Boyd, Edinburgh, 1965) p. 86.
No comments:
Post a Comment