Singletons and Multiples in Scientific Discovery

SINGLETONS AND MULTIPLES IN SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY:
A CHAPTER IN THE SOCIOLOGY OF SCIENCE *

ROBERT K. MERTON t
ofSociology,ColumbiaUniversity
Professor
I the one considerethman segregateor distribu-

tively;the othercongregate,or in society."2
HAVING takenall knowledgeto be his province,
So muchfor Bacon's effortto legitimatesocial
Francis Bacon made room even for what was to were
scienceat a timewhen its firstglimmerings
becomesociology. His luminouswritingsinclude
evidentto only a few and beforeits sporadicde-
a charterfor the social sciences,a proposed di-
velopmentduring that centuryof genius. No
visionbetweentheirseveraltypes,a preceptguid-
economist,Bacon could in 1615 originate the
ing theinclusionof problemsthatmightotherwise
term,if not the concept,of "balance of trade"3
be lost to the view of social scientistsand finally,
the same year in whichAntoynede Montchretien
an early, incompleteyet instructiveformulation
christened"politicaleconomy"(in his Traicte'de
of the hypothesisto which the greaterpart of l'cEconomie Politique). No psychologist,he
thispaper is devoted.
could by anticipationappreciate the efforts,in
With the seemingartlessnessof the trueartist, of a Hobbes, Descartes,and Spinoza
mid-century,
Bacon sets down in his Novum Organum what thehumanpassionsintrospectively,
to contemplate
amountsto a charterfor the humansciences:
attendingto problems of perception,sensation,
It mayalso be asked in the way of doubtrather imagination,and the like. No great admirerof
thanobjection, whether I speakof naturalphilosophy mathematics but cognizantof the value of quanti-
only,or whether I meanthattheothersciences,logic, fication,he could writeas he did generationsbe-
ethics,and politics,shouldalso be carriedon by this London haberdasherJohn
method. Now I certainlymean what I have said forethe extraordinary
to be understood of themall; and as the common Graunt, Sir William Petty, and GregoryKing
logic,whichgovernsby the syllogism, extendsnot could among themfashionthe new politicalarith-
onlyto naturalbutto all sciences;so doesminealso, meticand so initiatethe seriousstudyof demog-
which proceedsby induction,embraceeverything.raphy,urban sociology,and epidemiology.
For I forma historyand tables of discoveryfor
anger,fear,shame,andthelike; formatters political; Bacon did not,of course,foreseeall this. Little
and againforthementaloperations of memory, com- in his time would allow him to describe social
positionand division [this is probablyAristotle's science, in the fashion Galileo described me-
"affirmationand negation,"as Fowlermakesplaini, chanics,as "the verynew science dealing with a
judgmentand the rest; not less thanfor heat and
cold,or light,or vegetation and thelike.1 veryancientsubject." But his announcedphilos-
ophy of investigation allowed for such a concep-
Not only is Bacon preparedto encompassthe tion. In takingnote of this,we need not tryto
human sciences in his plan but he is carefulto fix a particulardate on which the birth of the
distinguishamong them. Almost as thoughhe social sciences was authoritativelyregistered.
were among us today exploringthe differences After all, Bacon had referred,with approving
and connectionsbetween the psychologicaland
social sciences,he describeswhathe calls "Human 2 Advancement of learning, The works of Franicis
Philosophyor Humanity"as having "two parts: Bacon, collected and edited by James Spedding, Robert
L. Ellis, and Douglas D. Heath, 6: 236-237, Boston, 1863
*Read January 23, 1961, in the Conference on the [hereafter cited as Works]. The pressures of time on
Influence of Science upon Modern Culture, Commemo- this occasion being what they unavoidably are, I resist
rating the 400th Anniversary of the Birth of Francis the temptationto remind ourselves of what Bacon goes
Bacon, sponsored jointly by the American Philosophical on to say about psychosomatics (if the anachronism
Society and the University of Pennsylvania. This may is allowed), when he follows precedent in writing of
be identifiedas publication number A-336 of the Bureau "the knowledge concerning the sympathiesand concord-
of Applied Social Research, Columbia University. ances between the mind and body, which being mixed
t I owe much to the Ford Foundation for a grant in cannot be properly assigned to the sciences of either."
aid of my studies in the sociology of science. Ibid., 154 ff.
1Novum organum, Book I, Aphorism CXXVII. 3 In his Letter of advice to Sir George Villiers.
PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, VOL. 105,NO. 5, OCTOBER, 1961

470
This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
VOL. 105, NO. 5,1961] SINGLETONS AND MULTIPLES IN DISCOVERY 471
comment,to beginningsof social science before When we considertheparticularsense in which

his time, remindinghis contemporaries, for ex- scientificdiscoveriescan be said to come about
ample,that"we are muchbeholdento Machiavel without being dependent upon the undoubted
and others, that write what men do, and not geniusof theparticularscientistswho are properly
what they ought to do," then adding, in that creditedwith these discoveries,or when we con-
statelyand incomparableElizabethanprose from sider here in passing, what I have considered
which peak we have achieved a steady decline, elsewhereat some length,the sociologicalimport
"For it is not possible to join serpentinewisdom of the frequentclashes over priorityof discovery
with the columbineinnocency,except men know that have marked the historyof science-when
exactlyall the conditionsof the serpent;his base- I examine these and related matters,far from
ness and going upon his belly,his volubilityand belittlingthe men of genius who have done so
lubricity,his envy and stinge,and the rest; that much to shape the developmentof science, I
is, all formsand naturesof evil: forwithoutthis, shall only be tryingto fathomtheir distinctive
virtue lieth open and unfenced."4 And so, in and complex role in that development. Perhaps
what follows,but withoutreferenceto serpen- the preceptof Bacon will help us find in these
tine evil or columbinegood, I shall try to obey mattersseeminglyincidentalto the workof scien-
the preceptof Bacon, and beforehim of Machia- tists,"excellentlight and information."
velli, by examiningsome of "what men [of sci- Afterhavingprovidedus withan attitudeproper
ence] do, and not what theyoughtto do." to a commemorative occasion such as this one by
Having legitimatized the social sciences,having urging us to take up and develop the force of
dividedthemintodistinctthoughconnecteddisci- what the memorializedman has said ratherthan
plines and having directed us to examine the merelyto repeat his words; after having given
actual and not to mistakeit for the ideal, Bacon us a charterfor the human sciences in general
gives us counsel about the scope of inquiry,urg- and having set out a useful though in the end
ing us to give up the "childish fastidiousness" temporarydivisionbetweenthe primarilypsycho-
thatwould have us examineonly those thingsin logical sciences that center on "man segregate"
natureand societythat we findgood or pleasant and the primarilysocial sciences that centeron
or otherwiseattractive. You will recall this bit "man congregate";afterhaving urged us to ex-
of advice, destinedto be echoed or independently amine what men do and not merelywhat they
reaffirmed in the centuriessince his day by many oughtto do; and afterhavingwarned us, at our
great men of science-by a Claude Bernard or a peril, not to exclude the apparentlymean or
Pasteur,among the many: trivialfromthe scope of investigation-afterhe
And for thingsthat are mean or even filthy, has done all this, as though it were still not
thingswhich (as Pliny says) mustbe introduced enough, Francis Bacon makes my lot here an
withan apology-suchthings,no less thanthemost easy as well as a pleasantone by practicallypro-
splendidand costly,mustbe admittedinto natural vidinga compositetextdealingwiththeparticular
history. Nor is naturalhistorypollutedthereby; subject I wish to examine: the import a meth-
forthesun entersthesewerno less thanthepalace, of
yet takes no pollution. And for myself,I am not odical investigationof singleton and multiple dis-
raisinga capitolor pyramidto the pride of man, coveriesin sciencefor our understanding of how
but layinga foundation fora holytempleafterthe sciencedevelops.
modelof theworld. That modeltherefore I follow. Instructedby the ideas that have been devel-
For whateverdeservesto exist deservesalso to be
known,forknowledge is theimageof existence;and oped after Bacon's time, we can piece together
thingsmean and splendidexist alike. Moreover fromhis fragmentary but instructive observations,
as fromcertainputridsubstances-musk,for in- the prime ingredientsof a theoryof the social
stance,and civet-thesweetestodoursare sometimes processesmakingfor discoveryand invention.I
generated,so too frommean and sordidinstances
there sometimesemanatesexcellentlight and in- say "piece together"because these ingredients
fomation. But enoughand more than enoughof are not to be foundin any one place in Bacon's
this; such fastidiousness being merelychildishand writings,neatlyand coherently tied up in a single
effeminate.5 bundle. In part,my reconstruction is deliberate
4Advancement of learning, Works 6: 327. anachronism. But in part also, it is not so much
5Novum organum, AphorismCXX. This same theme
was later takenup and amplifiedby thatthoroughgoing mental naturall philosophy,propos'd in familiar dis-
Baconian,RobertBoyle,in the firstessay of Part I of coursesto a friend,by way of invitationto the studyof
Some considerations touching the usefulness of experi- it, Oxford,1663.

472 ROBERT K. MERTON [PROC. AMER. PHIL. SOC.
readinginto Bacon as readinghim entireto gain bours" in science are not enough to advance
a sense of how he conceivedscientificdiscoveries science significantly; rather,that it requires the
to come about. "joynt labours of many," even to the extreme
To begin with,Bacon whollyrejectedthe no- of "joyning them into Committees(if we may
tion that in the new science, discoverieswould use that word in a Philosophicalsence, and so
typicallyappear at random,droppingdown from in somemeasurepurgeit fromtheill sound,which
heaventhroughthe agencyof star-touched genius. it formerlyhad)." 8 And still in the Baconian
Instead, he declares that,once the rightpath is vein, Bishop Sprat notes that social interaction
followed,discoveriesin limitlessnumberwill arise amongmenof sciencefacilitates originalityof con-
from the growing stock of knowledge: it is a ception; or as he puts it less austerely,"In As-
processof once fitfuland now steadyincrements semblies,the Wits of mostmen are sharper,their
in knowledge. This notion of what we should Apprehensionsreadier, their Thoughts fuller,
today describeas the accumulativeculturalbase thanin theirClosets."9
on whichsciencebuilds became one of the many Having formulatedtwo prerequisitesfor the
Baconian ideas taken up in abundance by his advancementof science-the accumulatingcul-
sometimesoverly-enthusiastic disciples at mid- tural base and the concertedeffortsof men of
century. Consideronly one of the more devoted science sharpeningtheirideas throughsocial in-
of these,JohnWebster,who in 1654 could pleas- teraction-Bacon returns,time and again, to a
urably refer to "our learned Country-manthe thirdcomponentin thesocial processof discovery.
Lord Bacon" as havingmade it clear that "every He tells how his proposed methodsof scientific
age and generation,proceedingin the same way, inquiryreduce the significanceof the undeniably
and upon the same principles,may dayly go on different capacitiesof men. You will recall the
with the work, to the building up of a well- ringingpassage in the Novum Organum to this
groundedand lasting Fabrick, which indeed is effect:
the only true way for the instaurationand ad-
vancementof learningand knowledge."6 . . . the courseI proposefor discoveryof sciences
is such as leaves but littleto the acutenessand
Second, Bacon holds that the individualman strength of wits,butplacesall witsand understand-
of sciencepursuinghis daily labors entirelyalone ings nearlyon a level. For as in the drawingof
would at best produce small change. As he an- a straightline or a perfectcircle,much depends
nounces in the Novum Organum,"the path of on the steadinessand practice of the hand, if it
be done by aim of hand only,but if withthe aid
science is not, like that of philosophy,such that or ruleor compass,littleor nothing;so it is exactly
only one man can tread it at a time." Consider, withmyplan.10
he says,"whatmaybe expectedfrommenabound-
context,and out of
ing in leisure"-it would be too much to ask Read out of its immediate
Bacon to foreseethe excessivelybusy life of so the numerous other contexts in whichBacon ex-
many present-dayscientists-"and working in 8 Sprat, Tho., The historyof the Royal-Societyof
associationwithone another,generationaftergen- London, for the improvingof natural knowledge,85,
eration. . . . Men will beginto understandtheir London, 1667; the same point of science advancing
own strengthonly when, instead of many of throughthe "joyntforceof manymen" or the "united
Labors of many" recursthroughout the History; e.g.,
themdoingthe same things,one shall take charge 39, 91, 102,341.
of one thingand one of another."7 This theme, 9 Ibid.,98.
too, was repeatedlypicked up in the seventeenth 10Novumorganum, AphorismLXI; also CXXII. The
century,not least by the firsthistorian of the strong-minded Macaulaymade this the buttof attackin
essayon Bacon;
Royal Society, "fat Tom Sprat," who, happily his,to somefamous,to others notorious,
Baconian scholar,Fowler, was
and the even-tempered
echoing Bacon, could proclaim that "single la- moved to say, "Bacon's promisenever has been and
6Webster,John,Academiarumexamen,or the exami- nevercan be fulfilled."As, of course,it cannot,if it
is read out of thecontextof the restof Bacon's writings,
nation of academies . . . offered to the judgment of all
thosethatlove the proficiencieof arts and science,and so thathe can be chargedwithgross exaggeration.But
the advancementof learning,105, London, 1654. Ap- need we forgetthis context,betterknown to Fowler
propriatelyenough,the book is dedicatedto Bacon. than to any of the rest of us? Farrington,above all
7Novum organum,Bk I, AphorismCXIII. I take othersknownto me, has recognizedthat only a mis-
translation
here the instructed by BenjaminFarrington, placed and narrowly-focused literalismcan lead one to
ratherthanthatby Spedding,Ellis, and Heath, or even assumethatBacon leftno place for the greatvariability
that by Fowler. See Farrington,Francis Bacon, 112, in the talentsof men engagedin scientific inquiry. See
New York, Henry Schuman,1949. Farrington, op. cit.,116-118.

VOL. 105, NO. 5, 1961] SINGLETONS AND MULTIPLES IN DISCOVERY 473
presses the same thought,this can be easily if among scientists will affect the likelihood of
not perverselymisconstrued. It can be taken to reachinga solution,but the scale of differences in
claim that all men of science are on the same outcomeis reducedby the establishedprocedures
plane of capacity. It has oftenbeen so mistaken. of scientific work. Only in this sense and to this
What is more, it has oftenbeen held to affirm degree, does the new science, in the Baconian
that all scientistsare being reduced to the same image, place "all wits and understandingnearly
level by the methodsof science ratherthan being on a level."
raised to a loftylevel of competence. To the threecomponentsof his implicitsocial
But as we know fromthe restof Bacon's writ- theoryor discovery-the incrementalaccumula-
ings,bothbeforeand afterthe Novum Organum, tion of knowledge,the sustained social inter-
he meant nothingof the kind. Repeatedly,he actionbetweenmen of scienceand the methodical
recognizesthat men have various capacitiesand, use ofproceduresof inquiry-Bacon adds a fourth
in his scheme of thingsscientific,he provides a and even more famous one. All innovations,
distinctiveplace for each kind. That dreamt-of social or scientific,"are the births of time."12
research institute,Solomon's House, allows for "Time is the greatestinnovator." He employs
all grades of abilityand varietiesof skills in a the same instructive metaphorto describebothhis
complex division of scientificlabor. The insti- own workand thatof others,as whenhe accounts
tute includes Merchantsof Light, who keep up his own part in advancingknowledge. "a birth
with the work going on in foreigncountries(in of time ratherthan of wit."13 Once the needed
the language of today, reportersof scientificin- antecedentconditionsobtain,discoveriesare off-
telligence); Mystery-menwho gather up the shoots of their time, rather than turning up
earlierexperimentsin scienceand the mechanical altogetherat random.
arts (in today's terms,the men who arrangefor To say that discoveriesoccur when theirtime
retrievalof scientificinformation);Pioneers or has come is to say that they occur only under
Miners who "trynew experiments, such as them- identifiablerequisiteconditions. But, of course,
selves thinkgood" (the skilled and creativeex- these conditionsdo not always obtain. In the
perimentalists) ; Compilers,or the lessertheorists, past, says Bacon, inventionsand discoverieshave
who examine the accumulatedmaterialsto draw made theirappearance sporadically,almost acci-
inferences fromthem; Dowry-menor Benefactors dentally. This is so because there did not then
who seek to apply this knowledge(men engaged exist the conditionsof cumulativeknowledge,the
in whatwe now call "researchand development"); associationof men of scienceand the methodical,
the Lamps, who "afterdivers meetingsand con- compositeuse of empiricaland reasoned inquiry.
sults of" the whole number,undertaketo "direct With the new science,all thiswill change. There
new experiments,of a higherlight,more pene- are secretsof nature,
tratinginto naturethan the former"(the experi-
mentalistdirectinga series of cumulativeexperi- . . .lying entirely outofthebeatoftheimagination,
ments); Inoculators,thetechnicianswho "execute whichhave not yet been foundout. They too no
doubtwill some timeor other,in the course and
the experimentsso directed,and report them"; revolution of many ages, come to light of them-
and finally,his Interpretersof Nature,who "raise selves just as the othersdid; only by the method
theformerdiscoveriesby experiments intogreater of whichwe are now treating, theycan be speedily
observations,axioms, and aphorisms"-the pure and suddenlyand simultaneously presentedand an-
theorist. Solomon's House makes room also for ticipated.14
the advanced students,the "novices and appren- With the incrementin thispassage, Bacon almost
tices" in orderthatthe "successionof the former but not quite achieves a sociologicalconception
employedmen not fail."11 of the development of science.
Evidently,then,Bacon does not put all men of To roundthisout,he need onlyadd the further
science on a single plane, nor does he foolishly componentthat if discoveries are "a birth of
regardthemas altogetherinterchangeable. Rather, time," they will be effectedby more than one
he emphasizeshis beliefthat the methodicalpro- discoverer. Never sayingthisin so manywords,
cedures of science make for greater reliability Bacon neverthelessintimatesit-and more than
in the workof science. Once a scientific problem
has been defined,profoundindividualdifferences 12Essays,in Works 12: 160.
13 AphorismCXXII, in Works8: 155.
11Cf. Solomon's House. 14Ibid.,Bk. I, AphorismCIX, in Works8: 142.

once. By paraphrasinghis language,I anachro- they know, not learn from it that which they
nize his idea, yet withoutdoing violence to it. know not."18 Yet apart fromthiscommonerror
What he all but says is thatmultipleindependent of mistakingthe new for the old in science,the
discoveriesdo occur but not nearly so oftenas factremainsthat "men may meet in consequence
people suppose. The erroneoussupposal is made or conclusion"despitetheirinitial divergenceof
both by those who mistakenlyidentifytheirown ideas. In effect,both adumbrationismand the
ideas as ancientones and by others who claim full denial of rediscoveryare faulty doctrines;
to find in the actually new what is ostensibly the truthis, in this reconstructedjudgmentof
old. This is how Bacon puts it: Bacon, that rediscoveryoccurs but not as often
as the adumbrationists suppose.
That of thosethathave enteredintosearch,some
havingfallenuponsomeconceits[i.e. notions]which Now I am not saying, of course, that Bacon
theyafterconsiderto be the same whichthey have formulated a coherent sociologicaltheoryof the
foundin formerauthors,have suddenlytaken a compositeelementsmakingfor discoveryin sci-
persuasionthata man shall but withmuchlabour ence. That would be adumbrationismwith a
incurand lightupon thesame inventions whichhe I recognizethat I have pieced to-
mightwith ease receivefromothers;and that it vengeance.
is but a vanityand self-pleasing of the wit to go gether his intimations of such a theory from
aboutagain,as one thatwouldratherhave a flower observations scattered through the works he
of his own gathering, thanmuchbettergatheredto wroteover a span of two decades. But withthe
his hand. That thesame humourof slothand diffi- advantageof historicalhindsight, and of the ideas
dencesuggesteth thata man shall but revivesome
ancientopinion,which was long ago propounded, that were formulated later, we can identifythe
examined,and rejected. And thatit is easy to err ingredients of such a theory in Bacon. He him-
in conceit[the view] thata man's observationor self did not see the connectionsbetween them.
notionis thesame witha formeropinion,bothbe- Or, if he saw them,he never recordedthemin a
cause new conceits[notions]mustof necessitybe is of
utteredin old words,and because upon true and form that has come down to us. What
erroneousgroundmenmaymeetin consequenceor interest,rather,is that these ingredientsshould
conclusion, as severallinesor circlesthatcutin some have appearedmore than threecenturiesago and
one point.15 thatmanymen over a long periodof timeshould
have come upon themanew and thattheyshould
The vice of what we may call "adumbration-
begun to composetheminto the beginnings
ism" -the denigrating of new ideas by pretending have
of a sociologicaltheoryof scientificdiscovery.19
to findthemold-must not be permittedto blind
us to the fact that rediscoverydoes sometimes
18De augmentis, in Works9: 170.
occur. It does not follow, however, that all 19Bacon had much else to say that qualifieshim as
newly emergingknowledge is nothing but re- a harbingerof the sociologyof science; I cannotdeal
discovery. Plato was mistakenin saying "that withthesemattershere. But at leasttwo setsof observa-
all knowledgeis but remembrance." 16 In part, tions can be segregatedhere below to intimatethe
the errorcomes fromthe recurrentpractice,par- broad scope of his understanding.First, he notes the
problemof the relationsbetweenthe social structure
ticularlyin "intellectualmatters,"of firstfinding and the characterof knowledge:"Of the impediments
the new idea strange,and thenfindingit exceed- whichhave beenin the natureof societyand the policies
inglyfamiliar.17In anotherpart,the errorcomes of state. That thereis no composition of estateor so-
fromtheselectiveperceptions of the reader. "For ciety,nor order or quality of persons,whichhave not
some point of contrariety towardstrueknowledge.That
almost all scholars have this-when anythingis monarchiesincline wits to profitand pleasure, and
presentedto them,theywill findin it thatwhich commonwealths to glory and vanity. That universities
incline wits to sophistryand affectation, cloisters to
15 Valerius Terminus of the interpretationof nature in fablesand unprofitable studyat large to variety;
subtilty,
Works 6: 72-73. The emphases are mine. and thatit is hard to say, whethermixtureof contem-
16 Essays or counsels civil and moral, Essay LVIII, plationswithan activelife,or retiringwhollyto contem-
Of Vicissitude of Things, in Works 12: 273; cf. Advance- plations,do disableand hinderthemindmore." Valerius
ment of learning, Works 6: 88. Terminusin Works6: 76. Thus we mustacknowledge
17 Advancement of learning, in Works 6: 130: "In that he sees the problemof the relationsbetweentypes
intellectual matters, it is much more common; as may of social structure work,what-
and typesof intellectual
be seen in most of the propositionsof Euclid, which till ever we mightthinkof his hypotheses.And second,he
they be demonstrate,they seem strange to our assent; identifiesall mannerof social considerationsthat affect
but being demonstrate,our mind accepteth of them by theways in whichmenof scienceand learningordinarily
a kind of relation (as the lawyers speak) as if we had record what they have learned (with the intimation,
known them before." perhaps,that this sorryvariationwill have to be suffi-

In all this, Bacon had taken hold of a salient II

truth: the course of scientificdevelopmentcan-
At the root of a sociologicaltheoryof the de-
not be understoodas the work of man segregate.
velopmentof science is the strategicfact of the
But he exaggeratedwhenhe wenton to theclaim,
multipleand independentappearanceof the same
which remainsextravaganteven when construed
scientificdiscovery-whatI shall,forconvenience,
as he evidentlyintendedit, that the new method
hereafter describleas a multiple. Ever since 1922,
of sciencewould "level men's wits and leave but
American sociologistshave properlyassociated
littleto individualexcellence." In this gratuitous
the theorywithWilliam F. Ogburn and Dorothy
over-statement he is not alone. For in the cen-
S. Thomas who did so much to establishit in
turies since Bacon, scores of observershave-re-
sociological thought.20 On the basis of their
peatedlystatedthe matterin much the same dis-
compilationof some 150 cases of independentdis-
junctive terms: shall we regard the course of
covery and invention,they concluded that the
science and technologyas a continuingprocess
innovationsbecame virtuallyinevitableas certain
of cumulativegrowth,withdiscoveriestendingto
kinds of knowledgeaccumulatedin the cultural
come in theirdue time, or as the work of men
heritageand as social developmentsdirectedthe
of genius who, withtheirancillaries,bringabout
attentionof investigatorsto particularproblems.
basic advances in science? In the ordinaryway,
these are put as alternatives:either the social Appropriatelyenough, this is an hypothesis
confirmed by its own history. (Almost, as we
theoryof discoveryor the "heroic"theory. What
Bacon sensed,othersglimpseda littlemore fully, shall see, it is a Shakespearian play within a
play.) For this idea of the sociologicalsignifi-
without questioningthe assumed opposition of
cance of multipleindependentdiscoveriesand in-
these theories of discovery. And so for more
than threecenturies,therehas been an intermit- ventions has been periodicallyrediscoveredover
a span of centuries. Today, I shall not reachback
tent mock-battlebetween the advocates of the
of the nineteenth centuryforcases. Let us begin,
heroictheoryand the theoryof the social determi-
nation of discoveryin science. In this conflict, then, with 1828, when Macaulay, in his essay on
Dryden,observesthat the independentinvention
truthhas often been the major casualty. For
of the calculus by Newton and Leibniz belongs
want of an alternativetheory,we have been con-
to a larger class of instancesin which the same
demned to repeat the false disjunctionbetween
the heroictheorycenteredon men of genius and inventionor discoveryhad been made by scien-
the sociologicaltheorycenteredon the social de- tists workingapart fromone another. For ex-
terminationof scientificdiscovery. ample,Macaulay tells us that
the doctrineof rent,now universallyreceivedby
cientlystandardizedif the institution
of science is to politicaleconomists,was propounded, at almostthe
advanceknowledge,ratherthanto congealit): ". . . as samemoment, by twowritersunconnected witheach
knowledgeshave hithertobeen delivered,thereis a kind other. Precedingspeculators had longbeenblunder-
of contractof errorbetweenthedeliverer
andthereceiver; ing roundabout it; and it could not possiblyhave
for he who deliversknowledgedesires to deliverit in been missedmuchlongerby the mostheedlessin-
such formas may be best believed,and not as may be quirer.
mostconveniently examined;and he who receivesknowl-
edge desires presentsatisfaction,withoutwaiting for And thenhe concludes,in trulyMacaulayanprose
due inquiry;and so rathernot to doubt,thannot to err; and withthe unmistakableMacaulayan flair:
glorymakingthe deliverercarefulnot to lay open his
weakness,and sloth makingthe receiverunwillingto
try his strength. But knowledgethat is deliveredto We are inclinedto thinkthat,withrespectto every
othersas a threadto be spunon oughtto be insinuated greatadditionwhichhas beenmadeto the stockof
(if it were possible) in the same methodwhereinit humanknowledge, the case has been similiar:that
was originallyinvented.And this indeedis possiblein withoutCopernicus we shouldhavebeenCopernicans
knowledgegained by induction;but in this same antici- -that withoutColumbusAmericawouldhave been
pated and prematureknowledge(which is in use) a discovered-thatwithoutLocke we shouldhave pos-
man cannoteasily say how he came to the knowledge sesseda just theoryof the originof humanideas.2'
whichhe has obtained. Yet certainlyit is possiblefor
a man in a greateror less degree to revisithis own 20 Ogburn,W. F., and D. S. Thomas,Are inventions
knowledge,and trace over again the footstepsboth of inevitable? Political Science Quarterly, 83-98, March
his cognitionand his consent; and by that means to 1922; Ogburn,W. F., Social change,90-122,New York,
transplantit intoanothermindjust as itgrewinhisown." Huebsch,1922.
De augmentis, in Works 9: 122-123; cf. also 16-18; 21 Miscellaneous works of Lord Macaulay, edited by
Valerius Terminu-sin Works 6: 70-71. Lady Trevelyan,1: 110-111,New York, Harper, 1880.

This is not the time to examine in detail the point during the few years precedingand
many occasions on which the fact of multiples who returnedto the same subjectin 1874, in
withits implicationsfora theoryof scientificde- his English Men of Science;
velopmenthas been noted; on the evidence,often 1885-by the now little-known American an-
independently notedand set downin print. Work- thropologists,Babcock and Pierce;
ing scientists,historiansand sociologistsof sci- 1894-Friedrich Engels, in his letterto Heinz
ence, biographers,inventors,lawyers,engineers, Starkenburg,wrote of his partnerin ideas
anthropologists,Marxists and anti-Marxists, that "while Marx discoveredthe materialist
Comteans and anti-Comteanshave time and conceptionof history,Thierry,Mignet,Gui-
again, though with varying degrees of percep- zot and all the English historiansup to 1850
tiveness, called attentionboth to the fact of are the proofthat it was being strivenfor,
multiplesand to some of its implications. But and the discoveryof the same conceptionby
perhapsa partiallistingwill bringout the divers- Morgan proves thatthe timewas ripe for it
ity of occasionson whichthe factand associated and thatindeedit had to be discovered";
hypothesisof independentmultiples in science 1904-Franqois Mentre,the French social phi-
and technologywere themselvesindependently losopher and historian,whose basic paper,
set forth: "La simultaneitedes decouvertes,"Revu.se
In 1828-as I have said, therewas Macaulay, scientifique,suppliesa list of some 50 cases;
notablyin his essay on Dryden; 1905-Albert Venn Dicey, English jurist and
1835-Auguste Comte,in his Positive Philos- politicalscientistin his magisterialLectures
ophy; on the Relation between Law and Public
1846, 1847 and 1848-the mathematician and Opinion;
logician,Augustusde Morgan; 1906-1913-Pierre Duhem,thephysico-chemist
1855-Sir David Brewster,the physicist,edi- and one of the fathersof the modernhistory
tor of the Edinburgh Encyclopedia and of science,who examinesthe factand impli-
warmlyappreciativethoughnot always dis- cationsof multiplesin everyone of his major
criminating biographerof Newton,who was works;
himselfinvolvedin several multiplesin di- 1906-the distinguishedGerman physiologist,
optricswith Malus and Fresnel; Emil Du Bois-Reymond;
1862-1864-when there was printedan entire 1913-the man who was to become the dean
clusterof observationsupon multiples,grow- of American historiansof science, George
ing out of the then-current controversyin Sarton;
England over the patent system,such that 1917-the dean of American anthropologists,
the London Times ran repeatedleaders on A. L. Kroeber;
the subject,remarkingthe commonnotoriety 1921-by Einstein; and then,as we near the
of the fact "that the progressof mechanical formulation best known,inthe United States,
discoveryis constantlymarkedby the simul- in
taneousrevelationto manymindsof the same 1922-the fact and associated hypothesisof
methodof overcomingsome practical diffi- multiplesas statedby the historianof science
culty" (13th September1865); Abel Rey in France; by the thenleadingex-
1864-Samuel Smiles, that immenselypopular ponentof Marxist theoryin Russia, Nicolai
Victorian biographerand apostle of self- Bukharin;by theauthoritative politicalscien-
help,repeatedlytouchedupon thefactof mul- tist and essayist,Viscount Morley in Eng-
tiples; land; and, of course,by Ogburnand Thomas
1869-Franqois Arago, the astronomer, physi- in the United States.
cist, biographerand permanentsecretaryof The limitsof my time and your patiencehave
the Academy of Sciences, made much of requiredme to confinethispartiallist to thenine-
multiples; teenthcenturyand the earlytwentieth. But this
1869-Francis Galton who, in his Hereditary self-setrule mustbe breachedat least once. For
Genius, considered "it notorious that the on this occasion, we can scarcely exclude the
same discoveryis frequentlymade simul- observationson the subject made by the chief
taneouslyand quite independently, by differ- founderof both the American PhilosophicalSo-
ent persons" as attestedby famous cases in ciety and the Universityof Pennsylvania. Of

Franklin'sseveralversionsof the matter,I select theoryof multipleswas published,it has periodi-

one thatbears his unmistakableimprint. Writing cally emergedas an idea new to manyobservers
to the Abbe de la Roche, he remarks: who workedit out forthemselves.
I have oftennoted,in readingthe worksof M. Even so, the fact of multiple discoveriesin
Helvetius,that,thoughwe were born and brought sciencecontinuesto be regardedby some,includ-
up in two countriesso remotefromeach other,we ing mindsof a high order,as somethingsurpass-
have oftenhit upon the same thoughts;and it is ing strangeand almost unexplainable. Here is
a reflectionveryflatteringto me thatwe have loved
thesamestudiesand,so faras we haveknownthem, that great pathologistand historianof medicine,
the same friends, and the same woman.22 William Henry Welch, on the subject:
Here, as elsewhere,Franklintakes the occurrence The circumstances that a long-awaited discovery
of multiplesas a matterof course. or invention has beenmadebymorethanone investi-
gator,independently and almostsimultaneously, and
Justso do most of the othersin the truncated withvarying approachto completeness, is a curious
list of multiplediscoveriesof the theoryof multi- and not always explicablephenomenon familiarin
ple discoveries. That many,indeedmost,of them thehistoryof discovery....28
came upon the idea independently is at least sug- Other scholarstacitlyassume that the pattern
gested by the formin which they presentit, as of
multiplesis both curious and distinctiveof
somethingtheyhave found worthyof note. Its theirown fieldof
inquiry,if not entirelyconfined
independenceis suggested also by the interest to it. As one
example,considerthe observation
which each succeedingformulationof the idea by the notable historian
of geometry,Julian
excited among those readers who happened also Lowell Coolidge:
to be reviewersof the book. The factis thatthe
theorywas mostunevenlydiffused amongscholars It is a curiousfactin the historyof mathematics
thatdiscoveries ofthegreatestimportance weremade
and scientists. By the middle of the nineteenth simultaneously by different menof genius.24
it
century, had become,for some,a commonplace
and oftendeploredtruth;forothers,it represented And recently,the sociologistTalcott Parsons
an entirelynew conceptionof how science ad- is recorded as having described the threefold,
vances throughthe progressiveaccumulationof or possiblyfivefold, discoveryof "the internaliza-
knowledgeand immanentlyor socially induced tion of values and culture as part of the person-
foci of attentionto particularproblemsby many ality"as "a veryremarkablephenomenonbecause
scientistsat about the same time. all of thesepeople were independentof each other
Furtherevidencethat the idea-which has, in and theirdiscoveryis . . . fundamental...." 25
a sense, been "in the air" for about three cen- In part, of course, observationsof this kind
turies-was being independentlyrediscoveredis are merelycasual remarks,not to be taken liter-
also inadvertently supplied by those critics who ally. But I should like now to develop the hy-
attackedit as thoroughlyunsound or at least as pothesisthat,far frombeing odd or curious or
ideologicallysuspicious. Down to the present remarkable,the patternof independentmultiple
day, some authors can bring themselvesto de- discoveriesin scienceis in principlethe dominant
scribethehypothesis as essentiallyMarxistand so, pattern,ratherthan a subsidiaryone. It is the
we are invited to suppose, as necessarilyfalse. singletons-discoveriesmade only once in the
That Marx was a precociousboy of ten when historyof science-that are the residual cases,
Macaulay firstset down his ideas on the subject requiring special explanation. Put even more
and a high-spirited youthof eighteenor so when sharply,the hypothesisstates that all scientific
Comte assertedthe same ideas-the same Comte discoveriesare in principlemultiples,including
destinedto be the butt of Marx's ire-all this those thaton the surfaceappear to be singletons.
would appear unknownto those criticswho de- Stated in this extreme form,the hypothesis
scribethe theoryof multiplesas entirelyMarxist. mustat firstsound extravagant,not to say incor-
What the early Victorianwritersof leaders for rigible,removedfromany possible test of com-
the London Times would have said of this de- petentevidence. For if even historicallyestab-
scriptionof the hypothesistheyput in printcan 23 Welch, William Henry, Papers and addresses 3:
unfortunatelyonly be conjectured. In short, 229, Baltimore,JohnsHopkinsPress, 1920.
24 Coolidge,Julian
despitethe manydistinctoccasions on which the Lowell, A historyof geometrical
methods,122,Oxford,ClarendonPress, 1940.
22 Smyth,Albert Henry, The writingsof Benjamin 25 Parsons, Talcott, in Alpha Kappa Deltan: a so-
Franklin7: 434-435,New York, Macmillan,1905-1907. ciologicaljournal 29: 3-12, at 9-10, Winter1959.

lished singletonsare declaredto be multiples-in- Laplace, Galois, Dedekind, Franz Neumann,

principle-potentialmultiples that happened to Grassmann,Hamilton,and others.27Again, pre-
emergeas singletons-it would seem that this is sumed singletonsturnedout to be multiples,as
a self-sealinghypothesis,immune to investiga- once unpublishedworkbecameknown. Far from
tion. And yet,it maybe thatthingsare not really being exceptions,Cavendish and Gauss are in-
as bad as all that. stancesof a largerclass.
An incorrigible hypothesisis, of course,not an What holds for unpublishedwork oftenholds
hypothesisat all, but onlya dogmaor perhapsan also for work which, though published,proved
incantation. I suggest,however,that far from relativelyneglectedor inaccessible,owing either
being incorrigibleand thereforeoutrageous,this to its being at odds with prevailingconceptions,
hypothesis of multiplesis actuallyheldmuchofthe or its difficulty of apprehension, or its havingbeen
timeby workingscientists. The evidenceforthis printedin little-known journals,and so on. Here,
is ready to hand and once its pertinenceis seen, again, singletonsbecome redefinedas multiples
it can be gatheredin abundance. Here, then,are when the earlierwork is belatedlyidentified.In
ten kinds of relatedevidencethatbears upon the this class of cases, to choose among the most
hypothesisthatdiscoveriesin scienceare in prin- familiar,we need only recall Mendel and Gibbs.
ciple multiples,with the singletonsbeing the ex- The case of Mendel28 is too well knownto need
ceptionaltype requiringspecial explanation. (I review; that of Gibbs almost as familiar,since
wish it were possible to consider each of these Ostwald, in his prefaceto the Germaneditionof
kindsof evidencein detail,but thatis clearlyout the Studies in Thermodynamicsremarked,in
of the questionhere.) effect,that "it is easier to re-discoverGibbs than
First is the class of discoverieslong regarded to read him."29
as singletonsthat turnout to be rediscoveriesof These are all cases of seemingsingletonswhich
previouslyunpublishedwork. Cases of this kind thenturnout to have been multiplesor rediscov-
abound. But here, I allude only to two notable eries. Other,morecompelling, classes of evidence
instances: Cavendishand Gauss. Much of Cav- bear upon the apparentlyincorrigiblehypothesis
endish's vast store of unpublishedexperiments that singletons,ratherthanmultiples,are the ex-
and theories became progressivelyknown only ceptionrequiringdistinctiveexplanationand that
after his death in 1810, as Harcourt published discoveriesin science are, in principle,potential
some of his work in chemistryin 1839; Clerk multiples. These next classes of evidenceare all
Maxwell, his work in electricityin 1879; and typesof forestalledmultiples,discoveriesthatare
Thorpe, his completechemicaland dynamicalre- historicallyidentifiedas singletonsonly because
searchesin 1921.26 But in the meanwhile,many thepublicreportof thediscoveryforestalled others
of Cavendish'sunpublisheddiscoverieswere made from making it independently. These are the
independently by contemporary and later investi- cases of which it can be said: There, but for
gators,among them,Black, Priestley,JohnRobi- the grace of swiftdiffusion, goes a multiple.30
son, Charles,Dalton, Gay-Lussac, Faraday, Bos- 27 A preliminary list of such rediscoveries of Gauss'
covich, Larmor, Pickering,to cite only a few. unpublished work has been compiled from the details in
And in most cases, the rediscoverieswere re- his voluminous letters-e.g., Briefwechselzwischen Gauss
garded as singletonsuntil Cavendish's records und Bessel, Leipzig, WilhelmEngelmann,1880; Brief-
were belatedlypublished. The case of Gauss, as wechsel zwischenCarl FriedrichGauss und Wolfgang
we know,is much the same. Loath to rush into Bolyai, Leipzig; Teubner, 1899-and in Dunnington, G.
Waldo, Carl Friedrich Gauss, New York, Exposition
print,Gauss crowdedhis notebookswith mathe- Press, 1955. I shall return to the furtherimplications
matical inventions and other discoveries that of such repeated involvementof the same scientists in
turnedup independently in workby Abel, Jacobi, multiple discoveries later in this paper, when I propose
a sociological concept of scientificgenius.
26 The detailed cases of rediscovery can be garnered 28 Cf. Iltis, Hugo, Life of Mendel,New York, W. W.
from: Wilson, G., The life of the Hon. Henry Cavendish, Norton, 1932; Zirkle, Conway, Gregor Mendel and his
London, 1851; Cavendish, Henry, Scientificpapers, edited precursors, Isis 42: 97-104, June 1951.
fromthe published papers and the Cavendish manuscripts, 29This is the entirely apt paraphrase by Muriel Ru-
1: The electrical researches,by J. Clerk Maxwell, revised keyser, Willard Gibbs, 4, 314, New York, Doubleday
by Sir Joseph Larmor; 2: Chemical and dynamical, by Doran, 1942.
30 It is only appropriate that the original saying-
Sir Edward Thorpe and others, Cambridge, Cambridge
Univ. Press, 1921; Berry, A. J., Henry Cavendish: his "There, but for the grace of God, . . ."-should itself be,
life and scientificwork, London, Hutchinson, 1960. with minor variations, a repeatedlyreinventedexpression.

Second, then,and in everyone of the sciences, narily unknownforestallingof multiples. Sys-

includingthe social sciences, there are reports tematicfieldstudiesof this kind have turnedup
in printstatingthat a scientisthas discontinued large proportionsof what is often describedas
an inquiry,well along towardcompletion,because "unnecessaryduplication" in research resulting
a new publicationhas anticipatedboth his hy- fromimperfections in the channelsof communica-
pothesisand thedesignof inquiryintothehypoth- tion betweencontemporary scientists. One such
esis. The frequencyof such instancescannotbe study32 of American and Canadian mathema-
firmlyestimated,of course,but I can reporthav- ticians, for example, found 31 per cent of the
ing locatedmany. more productivemathematiciansreportingthat
Third, and closely akin to the foregoingtype, delayed publicationof the work of others had
are the cases in whichthe scientist,thoughhe is resultedin such "needless duplication,"that is,
forestalled,
goes ahead to reporthis original,albeit
in multiples.
anticipated,work. We can all call to mind those Fifth, we find seeming singletonsrepeatedly
countless footnotesin the literatureof science turningout to be multiples,as friends,enemies,
that announce with chagrin: "Since completing co-workers,teachers,students,and casual scien-
this experiment, I findthat Woodworth(or Bell tificacquaintanceshave reluctantly or avidlyper-
or Minot,as the case may be) had arrivedat this formedthe serviceof a candidfriendby acquaint-
conclusionlast year and that Jones did so fully ing an elated scientistwiththe factthathis origi-
sixty years ago." No doubt many of us here nal findingor idea is not the singletonhe had
today have experienced one or more of these every reason to suppose it to be, but rathera
episodes in which we find that our best and, doubletonor largermultiple,with the resultthat
strictlyspeaking,our most originalinquirieshave this latest independentversion of the discovery
been anticipated. On this assumption,I single never found its way into print. So, the young
out onlyone case in point: W. R. Hamiltonhits upon and developsan idea
The experienceof Lord Kelvinas an undergraduate in optics and as he plaintivelydescribes the
of 18 whenhe was stilltheuntitledWilliamThom- episode:
son, who sent his firstpaper on mathematics to
the CambridgeJournalonly to findthat he "had A fortnight ago I believedthat no writerhad
beenanticipated evertreatedof Opticson a similarplan. But within
by M. Chasles,the eminentFrench that
geometricianin two points. . . [and] when the period,my tutor,the ReverendMr. Boyton,
paperappearedsomemonthslater,prefixed a refer- has shown me in the College Librarya beautiful
ence to M. Chasles'memoirs,and to anothersimilar memoir of Malus on the subject.. . . Withrespect
memoirby M. Sturm. Still later, Thomsondis- to those resultswhichare commonto both,it is
coveredthatthesametheorems had beenalso stated properto statethatI had arrivedat themin myown
and provedby Gauss; and, afterall this,he found researchesbeforeI was aware of his.33
that these theoremshad been discoveredand fully What his tutordid for Hamilton,othershave
publishedmorethantenyearspreviously by Green,
whosescarceworkhe neversaw till 1845."31 done forinnumerablescientiststhroughthe years.
The diaries,lettersand memoirsof scientistsare
Far frombeingrare,thesevoyagesof subsequent crowdedwithcases of this pattern(and withac-
and repeateddiscoveryby a scientistof an entire counts of how theyvariouslyrespondedto these
arrayof multiplesare frequentenoughto be rou- carriersof bad news).
tine.
32 Cf. Menzel,Herbert,Review of
Fourth, these publicly recorded instances of studiesin the flow
of information among scientists,Columbia University
forestalledmultiplesdo not, of course, begin to Bureauof Applied Social Research,a reportpreparedfor
exhaustthe presumablygreat,perhapsvast,num- the National Science Foundation1: 21; 2: 48, January,
ber of unrecordedinstances. Many scientists 1960. Much otherappositeinformation summarizedin
cannot bring themselvesto reportin print that theMenzelmonograph cannotbe crowdedintothispaper.
theywere forestalled. These cases are ordinarily It shouldbe added,however,that these data were un-
coveredin studiesthatwere not focusedon the matter
known only to a limitedcircle, closely familiar of multipleand singletondiscoveries; judgingfromthe
withthe workof the forestalledscientists. Inter- personalreportsof previouslyundisclosedmultiplesthat
view studies of communicationamong scientists spontaneously came my way afterI had publishedan-
have begunto identifythe frequencyof such ordi- otherpaper on this generalsubject,I shouldjudge that
theseoccuron a scale so large thatit has scarcelybegun
31Thompson,Silvanus P., The life of William Thom- to be appreciated.
son,Baron Kelvinof Largs 1: 44-45,113,London,Mac- 33Graves,RobertPerceval,Life of Sir WilliamRowen
millan,1910. Hamilton1: 177,Dublin,Hodges, Figgis,1882.

Sixth, the pattern of forestalled multiples that multiples,both potentialand actual, are the
emergesas part of the oral traditionratherthan rule in scientificdiscoveryand singletons,the
the writtenone in still anotherform: as part of exceptionrequiringspecial explanation. I turn
lectures. Here again, one instance must stand now to evidenceof quiteanothersort,thebehavior
for many. Consideronly the famouslecturesof of scientists themselves and the assumptions
Kelvin at theJohnsHopkinswhere,it is recorded, underlyingthat behavior. And here, I suggest
he enjoyed "the surpriseof finding[frommem- that far frombeing outrageous,the hypothesisis
bers of his audience] that some of the thingshe in factcommonlyadopted as a workingassump-
was newly discoveringfor himselfhad already tion by scientiststhemselves. I suggest that in
been discoveredand publishedby others."34 actual practice,scientists,and perhaps especially
A seventhtype of pattern,tendingto convert the greatestamong them,themselvesassume that
potentialmultiplesinto singletons,so far as the singleton discoveries are imminent multiples.
formalhistoricalrecordgoes, occurs when scien- Grantedthat it is a difficult and unsure task to
tistshave been divertedfroma clearlydeveloped infer beliefs from behavior; almost as difficult
programof investigationwhich,fromall indica- and unsureas to inferbehaviorfrombeliefs. But
tions, was pointed in the directionsuccessfully in this case, we shall see that the behavior of
taken up by others. It is of course conjecture scientistsclearlytestifiesto theirunderlying belief
thatthediscoveriesactuallymade by otherswould thatdiscoveriesin scienceare potentialmultiples.
in fact have been made by the firstbut diverted After all, scientistshave cause to know that
investigator. But considerhow such a scientist many discoveriesare made independently.They
as Sir Ronald Ross, persuadedthathis discoveries not only know it, but, act on it.86 Since the
of the malarial parasite and the host mosquito cultureof science puts a premiumnot only on
were only the beginning,reportshis conviction originality but on chronologicalfirstsin discovery,
that,but forthe interference withhis plan by the this awareness of multiplesunderstandably acti-
authoritieswho employedhim, he would have vates a rush to ensure priority. Numerous ex-
gone on to the discoveriesmade by others: pedientshave been developedto ensurenot being
forestalled:for example, letters detailing one's
The greattreasure-house had been opened,but I new ideas or findingsare dispatchedto a potential
was draggedaway beforeI couldhandlethe treas-
ures. Scores of beautifulresearchesnow lay open rival, thus disarminghim; preliminaryreports
to me. I shouldhave followedthe "vermicule"in are circulated; personal records of researchare
the mosquito'sstomach-thatwas left to Robert meticuouslydated (as by Abel or Kelvin).
Koch. I intendedto mix the "germinalthreads" The race to be firstin reportinga discovery
with birds' blood-that was left to Schaudinn. I testifiesto the assumptionthatif the one scientist
wishedto completethe cycle of the humanpara-
sites-thatwas leftto the Italiansand others.35 does not soon make the discovery,anotherwill.
This, then,providesan eighthkind of evidence
Conjectural,to be sure,but withsome indications bearing on our hypothesis. There is the good-
that extraneouscircumstancesterminateda pro- naturedrace of Hahn and Boltwood,forexample,
gramof researchthatwouldhave resultedin these to discoverthe "parent of radium" which Bolt-
discoveries becomingmultiples rather than re- wood was able to findfirst,just as, when Hahn
mainingadventitioussingletons. discoveredmesothorium, Boltwood acknowledged
These several patternsof forestalledmultiples, his havingbeen outdistanced,sayingonly,"I was
however,provide us with only sketchyevidence almosttheremyself.. . .7 There is the account
bearingon the apparentlyincorrigiblehypothesis by Freud of how Breuer and he decided to pub-
lish theirstudiesof hysteriasoonerthanoriginally
84Thompson,op. cit. 2: 815-816. Kelvin tells of one plannedas a resultof Janethavingbegun to an-
aboutthisthreedays
suchepisode,thus: "I was thinking
ago, and said to myself,'There mustbe brightlines of ticipate in print some of the salient findings.88
reflexionfrombodies in whichwe have thosemolecules There is Ramsay telegraphing Berthelotin Paris
that can produceintenseabsorption.' Speaking about
this to Lord Rayleighat breakfast, he informed me of 36 The followingparagraphsare based on Merton,
this paper of Stokes's,and I lookedand saw that what discovery:a chapterin the
R. K., Prioritiesin scientific
I had thought well known,
of was there. It was perfectly sociologyof science,Amer.Sociol. Rev. 22: 635-659,1957.
butthemoleculefirstdiscoveredit to me." 3 For a fullaccountof thisparticular episode,see Eve,
35Ross, Ronald,Memoirs,with a full accountof the A. S., Rutherford, 164, New York, Cambridge,1939.
greatmalariaproblemand its solution,313,London,John 38 Freud, Sigmund, An autobiographical study,36-37,
Murray,1923. London,HogarthPress, 1948.

"at once" about his isolationof helium; writing pheticallywarninghis son that "no time be lost
Rayleigh to the same effectand sending a note in makingit [his non-Euclideangeometry]pub-
to the Royal Societyto establishpriority,just as lic, fortwo reasons:
he and Travers were to announce having nosed first, becauseideas pass easilyfromone to another,
out Dewars in the discoveryof neon.39 There who can anticipateits publication,and secondly,
is the enduringrace between those two young thereis some truthin this,thatmanythingshave
geniuses of mathematics,Niels Abel and Karl an epoch,in whichtheyare foundat the same time
Jacobi, to be firstin each new advance of the in severalplaces,just as thevioletsappearon every
side in spring. . . . Thus we ought to conquer
theoryof elliptic functions,with one then the whenwe are able, for the advantageis always to
otherbeing forestalled.40Or, again, thereis the thefirstcomer."42
forthright accountby NorbertWiener of the race
Almost we hear in these words the echoed
betweenhimselfand Bouligand in mathematics,
warningby other faithfulcolleagues of the im-
which making Wiener "aware that he must
minent danger of being forestalled:his friend
hurry,"led him to get offa shortnote forpubli-
RobinsonurgingOughtredto make his work on
cation in the ComptesRendus, this arrivingjust
logarithmspublic;43 Wallis and Halley warning
a day afterBouligandhad depositedsubstantially
Newton;44 Halley warningFlamsteed;45 Bache
the same resultsin a sealed envelopeat the Acad-
warningJoseph Henry that "no time be lost in
emy.41These instancesare of coursenot atypical;
publishinghis remarksbeforethe AmericanPhil-
Wiener is no more circumstantial and outspoken
osophical Society" now that word has come of
about his experienceof thissortthanwere Wallis,
Faraday's work on self-induction; 46 Lyell warn-
Wren, Huyghens, Newton, the Bernoullis and
ing Darwin (Edward Blyth notwithstanding)
an indefinitely large number of other scientists
that he must publish lest he be forestalled;47
throughthe centurieswhose diaries, autobiogra-
Bessel and Schumacherwarning Gauss that he
phies,letters,and notes testifyto the same effect.
will be anticipated(as he was) on everyside; 48
In all this, I exclude those cases in which
the elderly Legendre warning the young Karl
scientistsmove to establishtheirpriorityonly to
Jacobi that the youngerNiels Abel would over-
ensure that their discoveriesnot be diffusedin
take him in the race for discoveriesin the theory
the community of scientistsbeforetheirown crea-
of ellipticfunctionsunless "you take possession
tive role in themis made eminentlyvisible or to
of thatwhichbelongsto you by lettingyourbook
ensure that they not be later accused of having
appear at the earliestpossibledate."49
derived their own ideas from fellow-scientists
Betweenthem,Gauss and Bessel supplya beau-
who have borrowedthemor cases in which,like
thatof Priestley,scientistspublishquicklyin order tifully ironicinstanceof how apt it is forscientists
to assume that their original discoverieswill be
to advance sciencerapidlyby makingtheirwork
42 The letteris quoted in
available to othersat once. In this class of cases Bonola, Roberto,Non-Eu-
pertinentto the hypothesis,I referonly to those clidean geometry, 98-99, La Salle, Illinois,Open Court
PublishingCo., 2d rev.ed., 1938.
in whichthe rushto establishpriorityis avowedly 43 Correspondence of scientific
menof the17thcentury,
motivatedby the concernnot to be forestalled, for StephenPeter Rigaud, ed., 1: 7; 2: 27, OxfordUniv.
this alone is competentevidencethat scientistsin Press, 1841,2 volumes.
fact assume that theirinitial singletonsare des- 44Weld, CharlesR., A historyof theRoyal Society1:
408-409,London,Parker,1848.
tined not to remainsingletonsfor long; that,in 45Baily,Francis,An accountof theRevd. JohnFlani-
short,a multipleis definitely in the making. steed,the firstastronomer-royal, compiledfromhis own
But ninth,not all scientistswho see themselves manuscripts, 161,London,1835. This case has particular
involvedin a potentialmultipleare prepared to pointsinceHalley and Flamsteedwereof coursedevoted
be outspokenabout the matter. In manycases of enemies,but Halley thoughtit important thatno English
scientistbe forestalledby a foreignscientist.
this sort, their scientificcolleagues,or kin, are. 46Coulson,Thomas,JosephHenry: his lifeand work,
We have onlyto rememberthe elder Bolyai,him- 109-110;4748, PrincetonUniv. Press, 1950.
self a mathematicianof some consequence,pro- 47 Darwin,Francis,ed., The lifeand lettersof Charles
Darwin 1: 426-427,473, New York, Appleton,1925.
39Travers, Morris W., A life of Sir William Ramsay, 48 Dunnington,Gauss,216; Briefwechsel zwischenC. F.
133-179,London,Edward Arnold,1956. Gauss und H. C. Schumacher,ed. by C. A. F. Peters,
40 Ore,
Oystein,Niels Henrik Abel, 203, Minneapolis, 2: 82-83,299-300;3: 69, 75; 6: 10-11,55,Altona,Gustav
Univ. of MinnesotaPress, 1957. Esch, 1860.
41
Wiener,Norbert,I am a mathematician,92-93,New 49 Ore, Oystein,Niels Henrik Abel, 203, Minneapolis,
York, Doubleday,1956. Univ. of MinnesotaPress, 1957.

duplicatedby othersif theydo not put theminto samesealedup in a box mightbe deposited withone
printsoon. For years on end, the faithfulBessel of the secretaries,till it could be perfected,and so
Gauss to publish his new brought to light,this mightbe allowedforthebetter
has been haranguing securinginventions to theirauthors.58
discoverieson pain of being forestalled. At last,
Gauss behavesas Bessel would have him behave. From at least the sixteenthcenturyand as late
He publishesa treatiseon dioptricsand sends a as the nineteenth,it will also be remembered,
copyto Bessel who,afterheroicallycongratulating discoverieswere often reportedin the form of
him on the work, ruefullyreportsthat it thor- anagrams-as with Galileo's "triple star" of
oughlyanticipatesBessel's own currentbut still Saturn and Hooke's law of tension-forthe dou-
unpublishedinvestigations.50 ble purposeof establishingpriorityof conception
Gauss suppliesus withanotherstrikinginstance and yet of not puttingrivals on to one's original
of the scientist'sor mathematician'sfirmbelief ideas, until theyhad been worked out further."4
that a discoveryor inventionis not reservedto From the timeof Newton,scientistshave printed
himselfalone. In 1795,at the ripeage of eighteen, short abstractsfor the same purpose.55 These
he worksout themethodof least squares. To him and comparableexpedientsall testifythat scien-
the methodseems to flow so directlyfromante- tists,even those who manifestly subscribeto the
cedent work that he is persuaded others must contraryopinion,in practiceassume that discov-
alreadyhave hit upon it; he is willingto bet, for eries are potential multiples and will remain
example,thatTobias Mayermusthave knownit.51 singletonsonlyifpromptactionforestallsthe later
In this,he was of course mistaken,as he learned independentdiscovery. It would appear, then,
later; his inventionof least squares had not been thatwhatmightfirsthave seemedto be an incor-
anticipated. Nevertheless,he was abundantly rigible,perhapsoutrageous,hypothesis about mul-
rightin principle:the inventionwas bound to be tiplesin scienceis in factwidelyassumedby scien-
a multiple. As thingsturnedout, it proved to tiststhemselves.
be a quadruplet,withLegendreinventingit inde- A great varietyof evidence-I have here set
pendentlyin 1805 beforeGauss had got around out only ten relatedkinds-testifies,then to the
to publishingit, and with Daniel Huber in Basel hypothesis that,once science has become institu-
and RobertAdrain in the United States coming tionalized,and significantnumbersof men are
up withit a littlelater.52 at work on scientificinvestigation, the same dis-
There is a finaland perhapsmostdecisivekind coveries will be made independently more than
of evidencethatthe community of scientistsdoes once and that singletons can be conceived of as
in factassumethatdiscoveriesare potentialmulti- forestalledmultiples.
ples. This evidence is providedby the institu-
tional expedientsdesigned to protectthe scien- III
tist's priorityof conception. Since the seven- Beforeturningto the last part of this paper-
teenthcentury,scientificacademies and societies the part dealingwith a sociologicalconceptionof
have establishedthe practiceof havingsealed and the role of scientificgenius in the advancement
dated manuscriptsdepositedwith them in order of science-I thinkit necessaryto say something
to protectboth priorityand idea. As this was about the importfor the sociologyof science of
described in the early minutes of the Royal the fact that the theoryof multiplediscoveries
Society: has for so long remained largely undeveloped.
whenany fellowshouldhave a philosophical notion Afterall, it is almost fortyyears since Ogburn
or invention, not yet made out,and desirethatthe and Thomas presentedtheir list of independent
discoveriesand inventions. It has been at least
50 Briefwechsel zwischen Gauss und Bessel, Heraus- a centuryand a half since observersbegan taking
gegebenauf Veranlassungder KoniglichenPreussischen
Akademieder Wissenschaften, 531-532,Leipzig,Wilhelm 53Birch,Thomas,The historyof theRoyal Societyof
Engelmann,1880. London 2: 320, London,A. Millar, 1756. The French
51 Briefwechsel zwischen Gauss und Schumacher 3: Academyof Sciencesmadeextensiveuse of thisarrange-
387. ment; amongthe manydocumentsdepositedunderseal
52 Dunnington, Gauss, 19. Adrain, the outstanding was Lavoisier'son combustion;cf. CEuvresde Lavoisier.
Americanmathematician of his day, was involvedin Correspondance, Fascicule II, Rene Fric, ed., 388-389,
several multiples. See Coolidge,J. L., RobertAdrain Paris, Michel,1957.
and the beginningof Americanmathematics, American 54Cf. Merton,op. cit.,654.
MlathematicalMonthly 33: 61-76, Feb. 1926. 50 Cf. Birch,op. cit. 4: 437.

formalnote of the fact of multiples-even to the other,just about half were subject to a contest
extentof compilingshortlists of cases in point- over priority;of those more than twentyyears
and began to draw out the implicationsof the apart, four in every five were contested.Ethno-
fact. And, as we have seen, it has been at least centrismnotwithstanding, if the independentco-
350 years since Bacon set down some of the discoverersare from differentnations, there is
principalingredients of the theoryin his luminous slightlyless, ratherthan more, probabilityof a
aphorisms. Perhaps, then,it is not too soon to conflictover priority. And to allude to just one
beginmoresystematicinquiryinto the matter. otherpreliminary finding-thisone, on the whole,
That such methodicalinquiry may be worth ratherencouraging-thereseems to be a secular
theeffort is at least suggestedby somepreliminary decline in the frequencywith which multiples
findingsof one such study. Of the multitudeof are an occasion for priority-conflicts between
multiples,Dr. Elinor Barber and I have under- scientists. Of the 36 multiplesbefore1700 which
taken to examine 264 intensively. The greatest we have examined,92 per cent were strenuously
part of these-179 of them-are doublets; 51, contested;this figuredrops to 72 per cent in the
triplets; 17, quadruplets; 6, quintuplets;8, sex- eighteenthcentury; remains at about the same
tuplets. This aggregateof multiplesalso includes level (74 per cent) in the firsthalf of the nine-
one septupletand two nonaries,in whichmost of teenthcenturyand declinesnotablyto 59 per cent
the nine independentco-discovererswere pre- in the latterhalf; and reachesthe low of 33 per
sumably ready to entertainthe hypothesisthat cent in the firsthalf of this century. It may be
if any one of them had not arrived at the dis- that scientistsare becoming more fully aware
covery,it would probablyhave been made in any that, with growing numbersof investigatorsat
case. workin each specialfield,any particulardiscovery
Each of these264 multipleshas been variously is apt to be made by othersas well as by them-
classified,aftera search of the monographicevi- selves.
dence dealing with it. It has been classifiedin In any case, this firstinquiryhas been enough
the particulardisciplinein whichit occurred;the to persuade us that the statisticalanalysisof his-
historicalperiod of the multiple;the intervalof toricaldata bearingon discoveryis-a feasibleand
time elapsing between the repeated discoveries; instructivenext step in the sociologyof science.
the numberof co-discoverers;whetheror not it
gave riseto a contestover priority;the nationality IV
of the co-discoverers,distinguishingthose who Afterthis interlude,I returnto the last part
were fellownationalsfromthe rest; the ages of of thesociologicaltheoryof scientific development,
the co-discoverers;and so on. The information dealingwiththe role of men of geniusin thatde-
about each multipleobtained throughhistorical velopment. As I have intimated,the hypothesis
inquiryhas been coded and transferred to punch- of multipleshas long been tied to the companion
cards, in this way permittingdetailed statistical hypothesisthat the great men of science,the un-
analysis. deniable geniuses,are altogetherdispensable,for
This is not the occasion to reportthe findings had theynot lived,thingswould have turnedout
in hand; my purposehere is only to suggestthat prettymuch as they actually did. For genera-
the intensivestudy of particularcases of multi- tions,the debatehas waxed hot and heavyon this
ple discoverycan be instructively supplemented point. Scientists,philosophers,men of letters,
by methodicalanalysisof large numbersof cases. historians,sociologists,and psychologistshave
It may be of interest,for example, that 20 per all at one timeor anothertakena polemicalposi-
centof themultiplesunderreviewoccurredwithin tionin the debate. Emersonand Carlyle,Spencer
an intervalof one year; some of themon the same and William James, Ostwald and de Candolle,
day or withinthe same week. Another 18 per Galton and Cooley-these are only a few among
centoccurredwithina two-yearspan and, to turn the many who have placed the social theoryin
to the otherend of the scale, 34 per cent of them oppositionto thetheorythatprovidesample space
involvedan intervalof ten years or more. The for individualmen of scientificgenius. That so
shorterthe intervalbetweenthe several appear- many acute minds should have for so long re-
ances of a multiple,the less oftendoes it lead to gardedthisas an authenticdebateshouldnotkeep
a debate over independenceor other aspects of us fromnoticingthatthe issues have been falsely
priority:of those made within a year of each drawn, that, once the two theoriesare clearly

stated,there is no necessaryoppositionbetween sider the case of Kelvin, by way of illustration.

them. Instead,it is proposedthatonce scientific Afterexaminingsome 400 of his 661 scientific
genius is conceivedof sociologically,ratherthan, communications and addresses-the resthave still
as the practicehas commonlybeen, psychologi- to be studied-Dr. Elinor Barber and I findhim
cally,the two ideas of the environmental determi- testifying to at least 32 multiplediscoveriesin
nationof discoveryand of the distinctiverole of which he eventuallyfound that his independent
genius in discoverycan be consolidatedinto a discoverieshad also been made by others. These
single theory. Far frombeing incompatible, the 32 multiplesinvolvedan aggregateof 30 other
two complementone another. scientists,some, like Stokes, Green, Helmholtz,
In thisenlargedsociologicalconception,men of Cavendish, Clausius, Poincare, Rayleigh, them-
scientificgenius are preciselythose men whose selves men of undeniable genius, others, like
workin theend would be eventuallyrediscovered. Hankel, Pfaff,Homer Lane, Varley and Lame
These rediscoverieswould be made, not by a beingmen of talent,no doubt,but stillnot of the
single scientist,but by an entirecorps of scien- highestorder. The greatmajority -ofthesemulti-
tists. On this view, the individual man of scien- ples of Kelvin were doublets,but some were trip-
tificgenius is the functionalequivalentof a con- lets and a few,quadruplets. For the hypothesis
siderable array of other scientistsof varying thateach of thesediscoverieswas destinedto find
degreesof talent. On thishypothesis, the undeni- expression,even if the genius of Kelvin had not
ably large statureof greatmen of scienceremains obtained,there is the best of traditionalproof:
acknowledged. It is not cut down to size in each was in fact made by others. Yet Kelvin's
order to fita Procrusteantheoryof the environ- statureas a geniusremainsundiminished.For it
mentaldetermination of scientificdiscovery. At requireda considerablenumberof othersto dupli-
the same time,this enlargedconceptiondoes not cate these 32 discoverieswhich Kelvin himself
abandon the sociologicaltheoryof discoveryin made.
orderto provideforthe indisputable, greatdiffer- Followingout the logic of thiskind of fact,we
ences betweenmen of large talent and of small; can set up a matrixof multiplediscoveries,with
it does not,in thephraseof Bacon, "place all wits the entriesin the matrixindicatingthe particular
and understandings nearlyon a level." scientistsinvolvedin each of the multiples.Some
This enlargedsociologicalconceptionholds that of these others are themselvesmen of genius,
men of great scientificgenius will have been re- in turn often involved in still other multiples.
peatedlyinvolvedin multiples. First,because the Others in the matrixare the men of somewhat
genius will have made manyscientific discoveries less talentwho, on the average, are involvedin
altogether;and since each of theseis, on the first fewer multiples. And toward the lower end
part of the theory,a potentialmultiple,some will of the scale of demonstratedscientifictalentare
have becomeactual multiples;second,this means the far more numerousmen of science,who in
thateach man of geniuswill have contributed the the aggregateare indispensableto the advance-
functionalequivalentto the advancementof sci- mentof scienceand whose one momentof prime
ence of whata considerablenumberof othermen achievementcame when they found for them-
of sciencewill have contributedin the aggregate, selves one of the many discoveriesthat the man
some of these having been caught up in the re- of genius had made independently of them.
peated multiplesin whichthe geniuswas actually To continuefor a momentwith the specimen
involved. case of Kelvin, these 32 multiplesare of course
In a word,thegreatestmenof sciencehave been only a portionof the multiplesin which he was
involvedin a multiplicity of multiples. This is eventuallyinvolved. For, as I have said, these
true for Galileo and Newton, for Faraday and 32 are only the ones whichKelvin himselffound
Clerk Maxwell, for Hooke, Cavendish, and to have been made by others. Beyond these,are
Stensen, for Gauss and Laplace, for Lavoisier, the discoveriesby Kelvin which were only later
Priestley,and Scheele-in short, for all those made independently by others. Of these,we do
whose place in the pantheonof scienceis beyond not yet have a firm estimate. And beyondthese
dispute,however much they may differin the still,are what I have describedas the forestalled
measureof theirgenius. multiples:the discoveriesof Kelvin which were
Once again, I can only allude to the pertinent not, so far as the recordshows, made independ-
evidenceratherthan reportit in full. But con- ently by others but which, on our hypothesis,

would have been made had it not been for the much slower pace, by a substantialnumber of
widespreadcirculationof Kelvin's prior findings. otherscientists,themselvesof varyingdegrees of
Yet, even on this incompleteshowing,it would demonstratedtalent. The sociologicaltheoryof
seem that this one man of scientificgenius was, scientificdiscovery has no need, therefore,to
in a reasonablyexact sense, functionally equiva- retain the false disjunctionbetween the cumu-
lentto a sizable numberof otherscientists. And lative developmentof science and the distinctive
still,by the same token,his individualaccomplish- role of the scientificgenius.
ments in science remain undiminishedwhen we
note that he was not individuallyindispensable V
forthesediscoveries(since theywerein factmade There is perhaps time for a few needed and
by others). This is the sense in which an en- self-imposed
caveats. For I cannot escape the
larged sociologicaltheorycan take acount both
uneasy sense that this short, though you will
of the environmental determination of discovery grant me,
not entirelysuccinct, summary of
while still providingfor great variabilityin the masses
of data on scientificdiscoverymust lend
intellectualstatureof individualscientists. itselfto misunderstanding.This is so, if only
Just a few words about anotherlike instance, because so much has
unavoidablybeen left un-
in quite anotherfieldof science. Whateverelse said. As a
preventiveto such misunderstanding,
may be said about Sigmund Freud, he is unde- may I concludeby
listingsome seemingimplica-
niablythe primecreatorof psychoanalysis.And tions which are anything
but implicitin what I
still,only a firstexaminationof about a hundred have managed to
report?
of his publicationsfindshim reportingthat he First, in presentingthis modifiedversionof a
was involvedin an aggregateof more than thirty three-century-old
conceptionof the course of sci-
multiples,discoverieswhichhe made all unknow- entificdiscovery,I do
not implythat all discov-
ing that they had been made by others. Once eries are inevitablein
the sense that,come what
again, the patternis much like that we foundfor may,theywill be
made,at the timeand the place,
Kelvin. Some of Freud's subsequently discovered ifnotby theindividual(s) who in
factmade them.
anticipatorswere themselvesminds of acknowl- Quite the
contrary:thereare of course cases of
edged highest order: Schiller, von Hartmann, scientific
discoverieswhichcould have been made
Schopenhauer,Fechner. But many of the rest generations,even
centuries, before they were
of his independentco-discoverersor anticipators actuallymade, in
the sense that the principalin-
are scarcelyapt to be known to most of us as gredientsof
these discoverieswere long present
distinguishedfor the highestquality of scientific in the culture.
This recurrentfact of long-
achievement; men such as Watkins Lloyd, delayed
discoveryraises distinctiveproblemsfor
Kutschin,E. Hacker, Grasset, Neufeld,and so the theory
advanced here, but these are not un-
on and on. It requireda Freud to achieve indi- solvable
problems.
viduallywhat a large numberof othersachieved Second, and perhaps contraryto the impres-
severally;it requireda Freud to focus the atten- sion I have
given,the theoryrejectsthe pointless
tion of manyon ideas whichmightotherwisenot practiceof
what I have called "adumbrationism,"
have come to theirnotice; in these and kindred thatis, the
practiceof claimingto finddim antici-
aspects lay his genius. But that he was not pations of
currentscientificdiscoveriesin older,
individuallyindispensableto the intellectualde- and
preferably ancient,work by the expedientof
velopmentsfor which he, more than any other, excessivelyliberal
interpretations of what is being
was historicallyresponsibleis indicated by the said now
and of what was said then. The theory
many multiplesin whichhe was in fact engaged is not a
twentieth-century version of the seven-
and the manyotherswhich,presumably,he fore- teenth-and
eighteenth-century quarrel between
stalled by his individuallyincomparablegenius. theancients
and themoderns.
What has been found to hold for Kelvin and Third,the theoryis not anotherversionof Ec-
Freud is being foundto hold for all other men clesiastes,holding that
"there is no new thing
of undoubtedscientific geniusnow beingexamined under the sun." The theoryprovides
in the lightof the theory. They are all scientists growth, for the
differentiation, and developmentof sci-
of multiple multiples; their undeniable stature ence just as it allows for
the factthatnew incre-
rests in doing individuallywhat must otherwise ments in science are in principleor in
fact re-
be done and, as we have reason to infer,at a peated increments. It allows also for occasional

mutationsin scientifictheorywhich are signifi- that,in the end,thesetoo manifestthe same proc-
cantlynew even thoughthey are introducedby esses of scientific
development as the others.
more than one scientist. Sixth,and above all, the theoryrejectsthefalse
Fourth, the theorydoes not hold that to be disjunctionbetween the social determination of
trulyindependent, multiplesmust be chronologi- scientificdiscoveryand the role of the genius or
callysimultaneous.This is onlythe limitingcase. great man in science. By conceivingscientific
Even discoveriesfar removedfromone another genius sociologically,as the man who in his own
in calendricaltimemay be instructivelyconstrued person representsthe functionalequivalentof a
as "simultaneous"or nearlyso in social and cul- numberand varietyof often lesser talents,the
turaltime,dependingupon the accumulatedstate theorymaintainsthat the genius plays a distinc-
of knowledge in the several cultures and the tive role in advancingscience,oftenaccelerating
structuresof the several societiesin which they its rate of developmentand sometimes,by the
appear. excess of authorityattributedto him, slowing
Fifth,the theoryallows for differences in the furtherdevelopment.
probabilityof actual, ratherthan potentialmul- Seventh and finally,the diverse implications
tiplesaccordingto the characterof the particular of the theoryare subjectto methodicalinvestiga-
discovery. Discoveries in science are of course tion. The basic materials for such study can
not all of a piece. Some flowdirectlyfromante- be drawn fromboth historicalevidenceand from
cedentknowledgein the sensethattheyare widely fieldinquiryinto the experienceof contemporary
visibleimplicationsof what has gone just before. scientists. What Bacon obliquely noticed and
Other discoveriesinvolve more of a leap from many othersrecurrently examinedcan become a
antecedentknowledge,and these are perhapsless major focus in the contemporarysociology of
apt to be actual multiples. But it is suggested science.


Singletons and Multiples in Scientific Discovery

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Singletons and Multiples in Scientific Discovery

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Singletons and Multiples in Scientific Discovery

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

What are some of the main ideas Francis Bacon proposed regarding the study of the human sciences?

What are some of the main ideas Francis Bacon proposed regarding the study of the human sciences?

What were some developments in early social sciences according to the passage?

What were some developments in early social sciences according to the passage?

SINGLETONS AND MULTIPLES IN SCIENTIFIC DISCOVERY:

A CHAPTER IN THE SOCIOLOGY OF SCIENCE *

I the one considerethman segregateor distribu-

PROCEEDINGS OF THE AMERICAN PHILOSOPHICAL SOCIETY, VOL. 105,NO. 5, OCTOBER, 1961

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

comment,to beginningsof social science before When we considertheparticularsense in which

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

In all this, Bacon had taken hold of a salient II

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

Franklin'sseveralversionsof the matter,I select theoryof multipleswas published,it has periodi-

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

lished singletonsare declaredto be multiples-in- Laplace, Galois, Dedekind, Franz Neumann,

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

Second, then,and in everyone of the sciences, narily unknownforestallingof multiples. Sys-

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

stated,there is no necessaryoppositionbetween sider the case of Kelvin, by way of illustration.

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

This content downloaded from 140.142.214.159 on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 23:54:17 PM

You might also like