Appletons' Popular Science Monthly, February 1899: Volume LIV, No. 4, February 1899Various
Science
Appletons' Popular Science Monthly, February 1899: Volume LIV, No. 4, February 1899
Various
Science -- Periodicals; Technology -- Periodicals
In the observations of the meteoric shower of November 13,
1897, at Harvard College Observatory, one of the meteors
appeared, according to the calculations, at the height of
406 miles, and disappeared at the height of 43 miles, and at
a distance of 196 miles. Another appeared at a height of 182
miles and disappeared at a height of 48 miles, and a
distance of 74 miles. The first meteor was red or orange,
or, to Prof. W.H. Pickering, the color of a sodium flame,
and the other white. Both penetrated the atmosphere to about
the same depth, and both were clearly Leonids. These facts
go to show, Professor Pickering thinks, that the difference
in color noted is not due to a mere grazing of our
atmosphere in some cases, and a correspondingly low
temperature, but to an actual difference in the chemical
composition of the individual meteors.
Correspondence.
THE FOUNDATION OF SOCIOLOGY.
_Editor Popular Science Monthly_:
SIR: May I be permitted a word of comment upon your editorial entitled
A Borrowed Foundation, published in the December number of the Popular
Science Monthly? Whatever my readers and reviewers may have claimed
for me, I myself have never claimed to be the discoverer of "the
consciousness of kind." Not only Mr. Spencer, as he and you have
shown; not only Hegel, as Professor Caldwell has shown; but also
nearly every philosophical writer and psychologist from Plato and
Aristotle down to the present time has more or less clearly recognized
the phenomenon of "the consciousness of kind," although I do not know
that any one but myself has called it by just this phrase. The only
claim, then, that I put forward for my own work is that, in a somewhat
systematic way, I have attempted to use the consciousness of kind as
the postulate of sociology and to interpret more special social
phenomena by means of it. In other words, I have used it as a
"foundation"; and I am not aware that any other writer on sociology
has ever done so. Mr. Spencer, I feel quite sure, makes no such claim
for himself. The passage which he and you have quoted is taken from
the Principles of Psychology; it is not repeated in the Principles of
Sociology, where, if it had been regarded by Mr. Spencer as a
"foundation," it should have been put forward as the major premise of
social theory. Passing over the consciousness of kind, Mr. Spencer has
chosen to build his system of sociology in part upon other
psychological inductions, in part upon a biological analogy. The
tables of the Descriptive Sociology are arranged in accordance with
the organic conception, and nine and one half chapters of the
Inductions of Sociology in the first volume of the Principles of
Sociology are formulated in terms of it. Throughout the remaining
parts of the Principles, however, sociological phenomena are explained
in terms of two closely correlated generalizations that are
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account