Abstract
ArgumentD’Arcy Thompson has often been portrayed as a loner. His science of form has frequently been labeled anachronistic, idiosyncratic, and unconnected to his contemporary biology. This article aims to challenge this interpretation. Thompson's representation as a loner did not lie in the idiosyncrasies of his science, but in our own historiography. Through the use of unedited archival sources, this study shows that Thompson's biology was well-connected to an international research program – a program mainly shared by developmental biologists, physiologists, and morphologists. In addition, this article also aims to propose a new interpretation of Thompson'sOn Growth and Form. Drawing on his private correspondence and published sources, the paper re-contextualizes the contents and conclusions of Thompson's seminal work. We will see that Thompson defended a particular kind of organismal biology. The bio-science he supported stemmed not only from Aristotle's zoology or Pythagorean mathematics, but had many allies among twentieth-century naturalists.
Publisher
Cambridge University Press (CUP)
Subject
History and Philosophy of Science,General Social Sciences
Reference86 articles.
1. If I am to be Remembered
2. Huxley Julian Sorell . 1941. “Letter to Thompson, November 11.” Letter N. 25770, D’Arcy Thompson papers, University of S. Andrews Archives.
3. Huxley Julian Sorell . 1931 “Letter to Thompson, March 31.” Letter N. 10062, D’Arcy Thompson papers, University of S. Andrews Archives.
4. Mendelism in Relation to Disease
Cited by
19 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献
1. “A Single and Indivisible Principle of Unity”: On Growth and Form in Context;Biological Theory;2023-10-12
2. Bibliography;Horn, or The Counterside of Media;2022-01-07
3. Notes;Horn, or The Counterside of Media;2022-01-07
4. Conclusion;Horn, or The Counterside of Media;2022-01-07
5. Horn and Time;Horn, or The Counterside of Media;2022-01-07