(2) The Duke of Argyll says "that no serious reply has ever been
attempted" (p. 305).
The truth is that the highest living authority on the subject,
Professor Dana, published a most weighty reply, two years before
the Duke of Argyll committed himself to this statement.
(3) The Duke of Argyll uses the preceding products of defective
knowledge, multiplied by excessive imagination, to illustrate
the manner in which "certain accepted opinions" established "a
sort of Reign of Terror in their own behalf" (p. 307).
The truth is that no plea, except that of total ignorance of the
literature of the subject, can excuse the errors cited, and that
the "Reign of Terror" is a purely subjective phenomenon.
(4) The letter in "Nature" for the 17th of November, 1887, to
which I am referred, contains neither substantiation, nor
retractation, of statements 1 and 2. Nevertheless, it repeats
number 3. The Duke of Argyll says of his article that it "has
done what I intended it to do. It has called wide attention to
the influence of mere authority in establishing erroneous
theories and in retarding the progress of scientific truth."
(5) The Duke of Argyll illustrates the influence of his
fictitious "Reign of Terror" by the statement that Mr. John
Murray "was strongly advised against the publication of his
views in derogation of Darwin's long-accepted theory of the
coral islands, and was actually induced to delay it for two
years" (p.
Pages:
41
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
58