Three presidential addresses to the Chemical Section of the Philosophical Society of Glasgow : on the study of the history of chemistry, recent inquiries into the early history of chemistry, eleven centuries of chemistry / by John Ferguson.

  • Ferguson, John, 1838-1916.
Date:
1879
Catalogue details

Licence: Public Domain Mark

Credit: Three presidential addresses to the Chemical Section of the Philosophical Society of Glasgow : on the study of the history of chemistry, recent inquiries into the early history of chemistry, eleven centuries of chemistry / by John Ferguson. Source: Wellcome Collection.

Provider: This material has been provided by The Royal College of Surgeons of England. The original may be consulted at The Royal College of Surgeons of England.

    5/60 (page 3)
    would, if taken in its literal sense, make the study of natural science not a liberalising and humanising, but one of the most selfish and narrowing of pursuits. But as a matter of fact, even the greatest stickler for pei-sonal experiment cannot escape reading what has been done, and is doing. Indeed, for once we require to ask Nature, we consult books ten times. If books are not to be studied, what is the meaning of the haste to publish discoveries and discussions 1 Why should one not rest satisfied in one's own mind with having brought something new to light, instead of announcing it to the whole world 1 No one at the present day would venture to believe only what he had himself confirmed experimentally—that in his short life he could repeat and criticise everything that is doing by scores of workers in different departments—when it takes a large band of writers simply to reduce new investigations to a bulk in which they are available for perusal. Besides, all our theories are found only in books. Nature furnishes no theories. A science, however, is only a science in its theories, and to know these one must study them in succession in the books containing them. From what one sees, however, in current text-books, it is plain that the interest is supposed to lie in the matter of fact, and the historico- theoretical element is quite eliminated. Those who read even the larger works are left ignorant of the discovery of some all- important bodies. If such an epoch-making event as the discovery of sulphuric acid existed in the history of literature, philosophy, or art, how minutely would its history be examined and criticised !* suppose in a literary examination paper a review of the differences, say, between Pope and Tennyson was wanted, I imagine every one would be able to say something about the characteristics of these poets. But picture, the modern chemical student asked to recapitu- late Davy's arguments against the oxygen theory of acids, or the chief points in the long discussion between Berzelius and Gerhardt, or between Berthollet and Proust. And yet, I humbly conceive, the full comprehension of current views is unintelligible unless one has mastered preceding developments. Assuming, then, the lack of interest in history as certain, the question arises, Why is it so? So far as I am able to judge, it cannot be because the principles • There is perhaps only one chemical question the history of which has been minutely discussed, and on which paper after paper has been written,-the discovery of the composition of water. The most recent contribution to this ■uhject is by Dr. Kopp, in the third part of his BeitrHg-, 1875.