Reflections on the Decline of Science in England, and on Some of Its CausesBabbage, Charles
History
Reflections on the Decline of Science in England, and on Some of Its Causes
Babbage, Charles
Royal Society (Great Britain); Science -- Great Britain -- History
The reformers of modern times were less energetic in the measures they
recommended. Dr. Wollaston and some others thought the limitation of
the numbers of the Society to be the most essential point, and 400 was
suggested as a proper number to be recommended, in case a limitation
should be ultimately resolved upon. I confess, such a limit did not
appear to me to bring great advantages, especially when I reflected
how long a time must have elapsed before the 714 members of the Society
could be reduced by death to that number. And I also thought that as
long as those who alone sustained the reputation of the Society by their
writings and discoveries should be admitted into it on precisely
the same terms, and on the payment of the same sum of money as other
gentlemen who contributed only with their purse, it could never be an
object of ambition to any man of science to be enrolled on its list.
With this view, and also to assist those who wished for a limitation, I
suggested a plan extremely simple in its nature, and which would become
effective immediately. I proposed that, in the printed list of the Royal
Society, a star should be placed against the name of each Fellow who
had contributed two or more papers which had been printed in the
Transactions, or that such a list should be printed separately at the
end.
At that period there were 109 living members who had contributed papers
to the Transactions, and they were thus arranged:
37 Contributors of.. 1 paper
21.......... 2 papers
19.......... 3 ditto
5 .......... 4 ditto
3 .......... 5 ditto
3 .......... 6 ditto
12.... from 7 to 12 ditto
14... of more than 12 papers.
100 Contributing Fellows of the Royal Society. 589 Papers contributed by
them.
Now the immediate effect of printing such a list would be the division
of the Society into two classes. Supposing two or more papers necessary
for placing a Fellow in the first class, that class would only consist
of seventy-two members, which is nearly the same as the number of those
of the Institute of France. If only those who had contributed three or
more were admitted, then this class would be reduced to fifty-one. In
either of these cases it would obviously become a matter of ambition
to belong to the first class; and a more minute investigation into the
value of each paper would naturally take place before it was admitted
into the Transactions. Or it might be established that such papers only
should be allowed to count, as the Committee, who reported them as fit
to be printed, should also certify. The great objection made to such
an arrangement was, that it would be displeasing to the rest of the
Society, and that they had a vested right (having entered the Society
when no distinction was made in the lists) to have them always continued
without one.
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