The Scientific Basis of National Progress, Including that of MoralityGore, George
Philosophy
The Scientific Basis of National Progress, Including that of Morality
Gore, George
Ethics; Progress; Science
Many persons fancy that "it must be very nice to be always making
experiments," and that they "should be delighted with such an occupation"
if they "could only spare the time." But such an idea is only another
illustration of the general ignorance of the subject, and it is only
expressed by those who have never made a laborious and difficult research.
Pure research is by far the most difficult of all scientific occupations,
and this is another chief reason why discoverers are few, and why they will
probably remain so.
To succeed in research, a man must set aside all human pride, and approach
the subject with perfect humility; and this is not an easy task, men cannot
so readily abandon preconceived and cherished notions. Many researches are
moreover extremely dangerous. Thilorier was killed by the explosion of a
vessel of liquefied carbonic anhydride; Dulong lost an eye and finger, and
Sir Humphrey Davy was wounded by an explosion of chloride of nitrogen.
Faraday was near being blinded by an experiment with oxygen. Nicklès of
Nancy, and Louyet of Brussels, lost their lives, and two other chemists
were seriously injured in health by exposure to the excessively dangerous
fumes of hydrofluoric acid. Bunsen lost the sight of an eye and was nearly
poisoned by an explosion whilst analysing cyanide of cacodyl.[34] Hennel
was killed by an {195} explosion of fulminate of silver, and Chapman by one
of nitrate of methyl; and nearly every chemical investigator could tell of
some narrow escape of life in his own experience. Any one who wishes to
know whether it is "very nice to be always making experiments" should
attempt the isolation of fluorine, the chemical examination of some
offensive substance, or the determination of some difficult physical, or
chemical problem.
That a professorship of original research would "involve substantial work"
does not admit of doubt, and therefore "there would be some security that
it would be worthily bestowed." It would not become an "ornamental
sinecure," in which "there is pay but no work," unless, by assigning to it
too large a stipend, inducement was held out to that numerous class of
persons whose love of money is stronger than their love of truth, to seek
the office; to say the utmost, it could hardly become so largely a sinecure
as many offices now held by ecclesiastics. Jobbery and abuse of patronage
would be still further prevented by making the duties sufficiently heavy.
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