good faith--and I cordially sympathise with any one who is so charged
unjustly. Such cases have seemed to me almost the only ones for which
it is worth while entering into controversy.”... “These polemics of the
scientific world are very unfortunate things; they form the great stain
to which the beautiful edifice of scientific truth is subject. _Are
they inevitable?_”
Controversy whether in religion or science was to him alike detestable.
He took no part in politics. A letter to Tyndall (see “Faraday as a
Discoverer,” p. 39), written after the latter had told him of a rather
heated discussion at the British Association meeting in 1855, speaks of
his own efforts at forbearance. He says:--
These great meetings, of which I think very well altogether,
advance science chiefly by bringing scientific men together
and making them to know and be friends with each other; and I
am sorry when that is not the effect in every part of their
course.... The real truth never fails ultimately to appear....
It is better to be blind to the results of partisanship, and
quick to see good will. One has more happiness in oneself in
endeavouring to follow the things that make for peace. You can
hardly imagine how often I have been heated in private when
opposed, as I have thought unjustly and superciliously, and yet
I have striven, and succeeded I hope, in keeping down replies
of the like kind. And I know I have never lost by it.
[Sidenote: HATRED OF CONTROVERSY.]
During the years when he was examining the apparatus of rival inventors
for lighthouse illumination, he could calmly hear them described as
Mr. So-and-So’s electric lights, all the while knowing that it was
his own discovery of magneto-electric induction which had made the
mechanical production of electric light possible. Yet he fired up if
anyone dared to revive the priority dispute between Davy and Stephenson
as to the invention of the safety lamp. “Disgraceful subject,” was
his own comment. In his dispute with Snow Harris as to the design of
lightning rods, in which, as it is now known, Snow Harris was right;
in his dispute with Airy over the curved lines of force; in his minor
difficulties over Hare’s pile and Becquerel’s magnetic observations,
none could either assert his own position with more simple dignity, nor
admit with greater frankness the rights of his rival.
To Hare he wrote:--
You must excuse me, however, for several reasons from answering
it [Hare’s letter] at any length; the first is my distaste for
controversy, which is so great that I would on no account our
correspondence should acquire that character. I have often
seen it do great harm, and yet remember few cases in natural
knowledge where it has helped much either to pull down error or
advance truth. Criticism, on the other hand, is of much value.
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