An Ethics of Science Communication

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

An Ethics of Science Communication An Ethics of Science Communication Joan Leach An Ethics of Science Communication Fabien Medvecky · Joan Leach An Ethics of Science Communication Fabien Medvecky Joan Leach University of Otago The Australian National University Dunedin, New Zealand Canberra, ACT, Australia ISBN 978-3-030-32115-4 ISBN 978-3-030-32116-1 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-32116-1 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019 This work is subject to copyright. All rights are solely and exclusively licensed by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of the material is concerned, specifcally the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation, broadcasting, reproduction on microflms or in any other physical way, and transmission or information storage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specifc statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, expressed or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affliations. Cover illustration: © Harvey Loake This Palgrave Pivot imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland PREFACE Look to the manner in which people in the middle might argue the case. —Jonsen and Toulmin, The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning (Jonsen & Toulmin, 1988) In the outer suburbs of ethical circles, which is arguably where science communication lives, there has been a long-standing debate on how to make ethical decisions, choices and even sensible statements. It is useful for us to pause and take in the contours of this debate. Our guide for this layover might most usefully be the philosopher and historian, even polymath, Stephen Toulmin. Toulmin had an academic life that spanned continents and traditions, and he directly connects a long-standing phil- osophical tradition of ethics and reasoning with an equally long- standing tradition of communication, specifcally persuasive communication or rhetoric. In the mid-1970s, after writing a number of books on philos- ophy of science and informal logic, Toulmin served on the National Commission for the Protection of Human Subjects of Biomedical and Behavioural Research, established by the US Congress. During this time, he collaborated with Albert R. Jonsen to write The Abuse of Casuistry: A History of Moral Reasoning (1988). This book attempted to reject the two poles of moral reasoning: On one side are those who see some particular set (or ‘code’) of rules and principles as correct, not just now and for them but eternally and v vi PREFACE invariably. On the other side are those who reject as unwarranted all attempts binding on peoples at all times and in all cultures. (p.19) In short, Toulmin and Jonsen wanted a middle path through rigid moral rules which might prove inadequate to every possible case of moral rea- soning and a thoroughgoing casuistry that would insist that every case is so unique that no general moral reasoning is possible. What does this mean for science communication? Thus far, the feld seems to us be very much in the throes of the situation that Toulmin and Jonsen describe in the 1970s. On the one hand, calls for an ‘ethi- cal code’ for science communication have been commonplace for some time. Many in professional practice in science communication feel bound to existing codes—for example, the codes of practice for public relation practitioners and the code of ethics for journalists are popular stand-ins for science communicators. On the other hand, our academic literature is loaded with case study after case study of episodes of moral quandaries that have been handled for better or for worse and without much refer- ence to codes of ethics. Toulmin would tell us that we are in need of some pointers in moral reasoning in the feld—not a code and not the opportunity to study an infnite variety of case studies. He would admonish us to ‘look to the manner in which people in the middle might argue the case’. This is our attempt to inhabit the ‘middle’. Which bring us to the frst exercise in moral reasoning—who are these people ‘in the middle’ of ethical debates in science communication? For the most part, while scientists and communicators are seen to be the moral offenders, publics trying to make sense of both scientifc practice and actually trying to fnd meaning in science communication are ‘in the middle’. While this doesn’t mean we shouldn’t pay attention to the behaviour of scientists and communicators, it does mean that we do need to pay more attention to how that behaviour frames and even creates moral muddles for publics and audiences for science. This is more diffcult than just paying attention to the moral reason- ing of publics about science and communication. A big distraction is that ethics of science overshadow the ethics of science communication, and while they are sometimes inextricably interlinked, being clear about a sci- ence communication breach vs a scientifc breach is useful. PREFACE vii DON’T BE DISTRACTED BY THE ‘ETHICAL’ BREACHES OF SCIENTISTS SIMPLICITER Take, for example, the case of the so-called CRISP-R babies. In late 2018, He Jiankui announced the birth of twin girls with genomes that he and his team had edited. There has been vigorous debate and con- demnation of this as a breach of the ethics of science. A Nature com- mentator put it this way: By engineering mutations into human embryos, which were then used to produce babies, He leapt capriciously into an era in which science could rewrite the gene pool of future generations by altering the human germ line. He also fouted established norms for safety and human protections along the way. (Cyranoski, 2019) As more information emerges, however, it is also pretty clear that He Jiankui fouted established norms for science communication. These only appear, however, under more patient scrutiny. For example, He Jiankui chose to announce his scientifc work, not in the pages of an academic journal, but in a panel session at an international conference and as an ‘announcement’, not as a discussion of ‘interim fndings’. Media teams were summoned to take in the ‘announcement’, and though at that point no verifcation was possible that He Jiankui had done what he said he had done—alter the human genome—the story was promptly inter- national science news. This is not the frst time that ‘publishing by press release’ has been condemned in science communication circles. The most famous episode might be Pons and Fleishman’s press conference announcement that they had achieved cold fusion in 1989. A Google search now conveniently comes up with ‘Pons and Fleishman bad sci- ence’. While they did not achieve cold fusion in 1989, they also fagged the danger of making a grandiose public announcement as quality sci- ence communication. Without the press release, cold fusion would still not have happened. However, the press release raises questions of its own about how and when knowledge gets called knowledge and the eth- ics of its public announcement. The public announcement in the He Jiankui case is one of the many ‘case study of episodes of moral quandaries’, one where the ethics of sci- ence are messily intertwined with the ethics of science communication, viii PREFACE and such case studies are helpful. But in seeking Toulmin’s ‘middle’, we want more than case studies. We want case studies that acknowledge the uniqueness of individual contexts, and we want broader theoretical foun- dations that can meaningfully respond to a call for a code of ethics for science communication. If science communication is going to tackle its ethics questions in any depth, it will do so in this ‘middle’, by drawing on case studies, by exploring existing codes and norms and by appealing to ethical discourse more broadly. It is this ‘middle’ we strive for in these pages. Dunedin, New Zealand Fabien Medvecky Canberra, Australia Joan Leach BIBLIOGRAPHY Cyranoski, D. (2019). The CRISPR-baby scandal: what’s next for human gene-editing. Nature, 566, 440–442. Jonsen, A. R., & Toulmin, S. E. (1988). The abuse of casuistry: A history of moral reasoning. Berkeley: University of California Press. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Both Joan and Fabien wish to acknowledge the many interlocutors we’ve had as we thought about and then wrote this book. The pro- fessional associations in the part of the world where we live and work, the Australian Science Communicators (Joan is past President) and the Science Communicators’ Association of New Zealand (Fabien is past President) have sponsored conferences where we’ve tried out ideas with both academics and professional science communicators. This also extends to the international network of PCST and the Society for Risk Analysis. Thank you to all of our many colleagues who care about an ethics of science communication and have been generous with your com- ments and ideas. Thank you also to our editors at Palgrave and the anon- ymous reviewers who improved the book.
Recommended publications
  • Session Abstracts for 2013 HSS Meeting
    Session Abstracts for 2013 HSS Meeting Sessions are sorted alphabetically by session title. Only organized sessions have a session abstract. Title: 100 Years of ISIS - 100 Years of History of Greek Science Abstract: However symbolic they may be, the years 1913-2013 correspond to a dramatic transformation in the approach to the history of ancient science, particularly Greek science. Whereas in the early 20th century, the Danish historian of sciences Johan Ludvig Heiberg (1854-1928) was publishing the second edition of Archimedes’ works, in the early 21st century the study of Archimedes' contribution has been dramatically transformed thanks to the technological analysis of the famous palimpsest. This session will explore the historiography of Greek science broadly understood during the 20th century, including the impact of science and technology applied to ancient documents and texts. This session will be in the form of an open workshop starting with three short papers (each focusing on a segment of the period of time under consideration, Antiquity, Byzantium, Post-Byzantine period) aiming at generating a discussion. It is expected that the report of the discussion will lead to the publication of a paper surveying the historiography of Greek science during the 20th century. Title: Acid Rain Acid Science Acid Debates Abstract: The debate about the nature and effect of airborne acid rain became a formative environmental debate in the 1970s, particularly in North America and northern Europe. Based on the scientific, political, and social views of the observers, which rationality and whose knowledge one should trust in determining facts became an issue. The papers in this session discuss why scientists from different countries and socio-political backgrounds came to different conclusions about the extent of acidification.
    [Show full text]
  • Internationalizing the University Curricula Through Communication
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 428 409 CS 510 027 AUTHOR Oseguera, A. Anthony Lopez TITLE Internationalizing the University Curricula through Communication: A Comparative Analysis among Nation States as Matrix for the Promulgation of Internationalism, through the Theoretical Influence of Communication Rhetors and International Educators, Viewed within the Arena of Political-Economy. PUB DATE 1998-12-00 NOTE 55p.; Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Speech Communication Association of Puerto Rico (18th, San Juan, Puerto Rico, December 4-5, 1998). PUB TYPE Reports Research (143) Speeches/Meeting Papers (150) EDRS PRICE MF01/PC03 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *College Curriculum; *Communication (Thought Transfer); Comparative Analysis; *Educational Change; Educational Research; Foreign Countries; Global Approach; Higher Education; *International Education IDENTIFIERS *Internationalism ABSTRACT This paper surveys the current situation of internationalism among the various nation states by a comparative analysis, as matrix, to promulgate the internationalizing process, as a worthwhile goal, within and without the college and university curricula; the theoretical influence and contributions of scholars in communication, international education, and political-economy, moreover, become allies toward this endeavor. The paper calls for the promulgation of a new and more effective educational paradigm; in this respect, helping the movement toward the creation of new and better schools for the next millennium. The paper profiles "poorer nations" and "richer nations" and then views the United States, with its enormous wealth, leading technology, vast educational infrastructure, and its respect for democratic principles, as an agent with agencies that can effect positive consequences to ameliorating the status quo. The paper presents two hypotheses: the malaise of the current educational paradigm is real, and the "abertura" (opening) toward a better paradigmatic, educational pathway is advisable and feasible.
    [Show full text]
  • Sacred Rhetorical Invention in the String Theory Movement
    University of Nebraska - Lincoln DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln Communication Studies Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research Communication Studies, Department of Spring 4-12-2011 Secular Salvation: Sacred Rhetorical Invention in the String Theory Movement Brent Yergensen University of Nebraska-Lincoln, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/commstuddiss Part of the Speech and Rhetorical Studies Commons Yergensen, Brent, "Secular Salvation: Sacred Rhetorical Invention in the String Theory Movement" (2011). Communication Studies Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research. 6. https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/commstuddiss/6 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Communication Studies, Department of at DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. It has been accepted for inclusion in Communication Studies Theses, Dissertations, and Student Research by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@University of Nebraska - Lincoln. SECULAR SALVATION: SACRED RHETORICAL INVENTION IN THE STRING THEORY MOVEMENT by Brent Yergensen A DISSERTATION Presented to the Faculty of The Graduate College at the University of Nebraska In Partial Fulfillment of Requirements For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Major: Communication Studies Under the Supervision of Dr. Ronald Lee Lincoln, Nebraska April, 2011 ii SECULAR SALVATION: SACRED RHETORICAL INVENTION IN THE STRING THEORY MOVEMENT Brent Yergensen, Ph.D. University of Nebraska, 2011 Advisor: Ronald Lee String theory is argued by its proponents to be the Theory of Everything. It achieves this status in physics because it provides unification for contradictory laws of physics, namely quantum mechanics and general relativity. While based on advanced theoretical mathematics, its public discourse is growing in prevalence and its rhetorical power is leading to a scientific revolution, even among the public.
    [Show full text]
  • Galileo in Early Modern Denmark, 1600-1650
    1 Galileo in early modern Denmark, 1600-1650 Helge Kragh Abstract: The scientific revolution in the first half of the seventeenth century, pioneered by figures such as Harvey, Galileo, Gassendi, Kepler and Descartes, was disseminated to the northernmost countries in Europe with considerable delay. In this essay I examine how and when Galileo’s new ideas in physics and astronomy became known in Denmark, and I compare the reception with the one in Sweden. It turns out that Galileo was almost exclusively known for his sensational use of the telescope to unravel the secrets of the heavens, meaning that he was predominantly seen as an astronomical innovator and advocate of the Copernican world system. Danish astronomy at the time was however based on Tycho Brahe’s view of the universe and therefore hostile to Copernican and, by implication, Galilean cosmology. Although Galileo’s telescope attracted much attention, it took about thirty years until a Danish astronomer actually used the instrument for observations. By the 1640s Galileo was generally admired for his astronomical discoveries, but no one in Denmark drew the consequence that the dogma of the central Earth, a fundamental feature of the Tychonian world picture, was therefore incorrect. 1. Introduction In the early 1940s the Swedish scholar Henrik Sandblad (1912-1992), later a professor of history of science and ideas at the University of Gothenburg, published a series of works in which he examined in detail the reception of Copernicanism in Sweden [Sandblad 1943; Sandblad 1944-1945]. Apart from a later summary account [Sandblad 1972], this investigation was published in Swedish and hence not accessible to most readers outside Scandinavia.
    [Show full text]
  • UC San Diego UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations
    UC San Diego UC San Diego Electronic Theses and Dissertations Title The new prophet : Harold C. Urey, scientist, atheist, and defender of religion Permalink https://escholarship.org/uc/item/3j80v92j Author Shindell, Matthew Benjamin Publication Date 2011 Peer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation eScholarship.org Powered by the California Digital Library University of California UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, SAN DIEGO The New Prophet: Harold C. Urey, Scientist, Atheist, and Defender of Religion A dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Doctor of Philosophy in History (Science Studies) by Matthew Benjamin Shindell Committee in charge: Professor Naomi Oreskes, Chair Professor Robert Edelman Professor Martha Lampland Professor Charles Thorpe Professor Robert Westman 2011 Copyright Matthew Benjamin Shindell, 2011 All rights reserved. The Dissertation of Matthew Benjamin Shindell is approved, and it is acceptable in quality and form for publication on microfilm and electronically: ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ ___________________________________________________________________ Chair University of California, San Diego 2011 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Signature Page……………………………………………………………………...... iii Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………. iv Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………….
    [Show full text]
  • Hypotheses, Facts, and the Nature of Science by Douglas Futuyma How
    http://www.stephenjaygould.org/library/futuyma_theory.html Hypotheses, Facts, and the Nature of Science by Douglas Futuyma How, for example, can you be sure that DNA is the genetic material? What if the scientists who "proved" it made a mistake? Has anything really been proved absolutely true? Is science merely one way—the dominant Western way—of perceiving the world, no more or less valid than other perceptions of reality? Is evolution a fact or a theory? Or is it just an opinion I'm entitled to hold, just as creationists are entitled to their opposite opinion? Consider a hypothetical example. You are assigned to determine why sheep are dying of an unknown disease. You take tissue samples from 50 healthy and 50 sick sheep, and discover a certain protozoan in the liver of 20 of the sick animals, but only 10 of the healthy ones. Is this difference enough to reject the NULL HYPOTHESIS: that the two groups of sheep do not really differ in the incidence of protozoans? To answer this question, you do a statistical test to see whether the difference between these numbers is too great to have arisen merely by chance. You calculate the chi-square (χ2) statistic (it is 4.76), look it up in a statistical table of chi-square values, and find that "0.025 < p < 0.05." What does this expression, which you will find the like of in almost all analyses of scientific data, mean? It means that (assuming you had a random sample of sick sheep and healthy sheep) the probability is less than 0.05, but more than 0.025, that the difference you found could have been due to chance alone and that there is no real difference in protozoan infection rates of sick and healthy sheep, at large.
    [Show full text]
  • The New Celebrity Scientists. out of the Lab and Into the Limelight. Fahy, Declan
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works Publications and Research Baruch College 2016 Review: The New Celebrity Scientists. Out of the Lab and into the Limelight. Fahy, Declan. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015. Aldemaro Romero Jr. CUNY Bernard M Baruch College How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/bb_pubs/59 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] POLYMATH: AN INTERDISCIPLINARY ARTS & SCIENCES JOURNAL Fahy, Declan. The New Celebrity Scientists: Out of the Lab and Into the Limelight. Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield, 2015. 287 pp. $38.00 hardcover (ISBN 978-1-4422-3342-3) Reviewed by Aldemaro Romero Jr. Baruch College In the last couple of decades, we have seen the widespread ascendancy of the phenomenon of celebrity in society. Celebrities as a cultural manifestation are not necessarily something new. We saw that notion in the twentieth century being exploited by Hollywood through their “star system” as well as by sports teams hungry to increase their revenues. Now that phenomenon has expanded into areas that we would not have imagined decades ago, and one of them is in the field of science. With the advent of social media and the relaxation of social views regarding stereotypes, we have seen the rise of the figure of the celebrity scientist. In a very timely and well written book, Declan Fahy analyzes this phenomenon in depth and provides us with an understanding into this trend.
    [Show full text]
  • Creatures of Cain
    © Copyright, Princeton University Press. No part of this book may be distributed, posted, or reproduced in any form by digital or mechanical means without prior written permission of the publisher. Introduction Human nature contains the seeds of humanity’s destruction. Or so it seemed to popular consumers of evolutionary theory in the late 1960s who maintained that the essential quality distinguishing the human animal from its simian kin lay in our capacity for murder. This startlingly pessimistic view enjoyed wide currency in the United States between 1966 and 1975 and be- came known, by its critics, as the killer ape theory. Readers at the time associated the concept of humans as mere animals with three men. Robert Ardrey published The Territorial Imperative in 1966, which leapt off bookshelves across the country. He styled himself an amateur scien- tist and believed his experience as a playwright gave him unique insights into the composition of human nature. Konrad Lorenz’s white- maned visage loaned him a distinguished appearance despite the black rubber boots he fa- vored when showing people around his farm. Lorenz, the author of On Aggres- sion, which appeared in English translation the same year as Ardrey’s Territo- rial Imperative, would later share the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his perceptive contributions to the scientific study of animal behavior. Desmond Morris unknowingly capitalized on the success of both authors when he published The Naked Ape the following year. Well known as the host of Granada TV’s popular Zootime program, based out of the London Zoo, Morris soon gave up scientific work to concentrate on writing scientific non- fiction and refining his surrealist painting.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Science: Understanding
    UnderstandingScientific science: indifference: Understanding boredom Understanding science in a Mexican planetarium A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Social Sciences and Law A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Social Sciences and Law 2004 2004 María Alejandra Sánc hez Vázquez Department of Social Anthropology María Alejandra Sánc hez-Vázquez Department of Social Anthropology List of contents Table of contents List of figures 4 List of abbreviations 4 Abstract 5 Declaration 6 Copyright statement 6 Acknowledgements 7 Introduction 10 Explaining science: 10 Case one, the Engineer on Mars 10 Case two, the Biologists in Tequila 11 First arguments and first questions 13 A dual approach to the understanding of science 15 Exploring the public understandings 17 The scientists’ understanding of the laity 22 Scientists self image 24 The communication of science 26 Explorations in a planetarium 27 Chapter one: A planetarium’s multiverse 31 The Planetarium 32 The museographic exhibitions 34 The vintage car collection 35 The interactive zone in the Planetarium 37 The astronomy zone 39 The Jurassic world 42 The observatory and the telescopes workshop 42 The gardens 42 Abandoned areas 44 The Planetarium’s multiverse 47 Chapter two: Three ways to sense space 51 An ideal space for the understanding of science? 52 The offices 52 Borderlines 55 The doors 56 The hideouts 59 Meaningful spaces, spatial practices 60
    [Show full text]
  • Lecture 3: Evolution 1
    Pre-Darwinian thinking, the voyage of the Beagle, and the Origin of Species How did life originate? What is responsible for the spectacular diversity that we see now? These are questions that have occupied numerous people for all of recorded history. Indeed, many independent mythological traditions have stories that discuss origins, and some of those are rather creative. For example, in Norse mythology the world was created out of the body of a frost giant! Some early attempts at scientific or philosophical discussion of life were apparent in Greece. For example, Thales (the earliest of the identified Greek philosophers) argued that everything stemmed ultimately from water. He therefore had a somewhat vague idea that descent with modification was possible, since things had to diversify from a common origin. Aristotle suggested that in every thing is a desire to move from lower to higher forms, and ultimately to the divine. Anaximander might have come closest to our modern conception: he proposed that humans originated from other animals, based on the observation that babies need care for such a long time that if the first humans had started like that, they would not have survived. Against this, however, is the observation that in nature, over human-scale observation times, very little seems to change about life as we can see it with our unaided eyes. Sure, the offspring of an individual animal aren’t identical to it, but puppies grow up to be dogs, not cats. Even animals that have very short generational times appear not to change sub- stantially: one fruit fly is as good as another.
    [Show full text]
  • Lectures on the Science of Language by Max Müller
    The Project Gutenberg EBook of Lectures on The Science of Language by Max Müller This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere at no cost and with almost no restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at http://www.gutenberg.org/license Title: Lectures on The Science of Language Author: Max Müller Release Date: June 17, 2010 [Ebook 32856] Language: English ***START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK LECTURES ON THE SCIENCE OF LANGUAGE*** Lectures on The Science of Language Delivered At The Royal Institution of Great Britain In April, May, and June, 1861. By Max Müller, M. A. Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford; Correspondence Member of the Imperial Institute of France. From the Second London Edition, Revised. New York: Charles Scribner, 124 Grand Street. 1862 Contents Dedication . .2 Preface. .3 Lecture I. The Science Of Language One Of The Physical Sciences. .4 Lecture II. The Growth Of Language In Contradistinction To The History Of Language. 26 Lecture III. The Empirical Stage. 67 Lecture IV. The Classificatory Stage. 91 Lecture V. Genealogical Classification Of Languages. 136 Lecture VI. Comparative Grammar. 177 Lecture VII. The Constituent Elements Of Language. 208 Lecture VIII. Morphological Classification. 229 Lecture IX. The Theoretical Stage, And The Origin Of Language. 287 Appendix. 329 Index. 335 Footnotes . 387 [v] Dedication Dedicated To The Members Of The University Of Oxford, Both Resident And Non-Resident, To Whom I Am Indebted For Numerous Proofs Of Sympathy And Kindness During The Last Twelve Years, In Grateful Acknowledgment Of Their Generous Support On The 7th Of December, 1860.
    [Show full text]
  • Lectures on the Science of Language Delivered at the Royal Institution of Great Britain in April, May, and June, 1861
    Lectures on The Science of Language Delivered At The Royal Institution of Great Britain In April, May, and June, 1861. By Max Müller, M. A. Fellow of All Souls College, Oxford; Correspondence Member of the Imperial Institute of France. From the Second London Edition, Revised. New York: Charles Scribner, 124 Grand Street. 1862 Contents Dedication . .2 Preface. .3 Lecture I. The Science Of Language One Of The Physical Sciences. .4 Lecture II. The Growth Of Language In Contradistinction To The History Of Language. 26 Lecture III. The Empirical Stage. 67 Lecture IV. The Classificatory Stage. 91 Lecture V. Genealogical Classification Of Languages. 136 Lecture VI. Comparative Grammar. 177 Lecture VII. The Constituent Elements Of Language. 208 Lecture VIII. Morphological Classification. 229 Lecture IX. The Theoretical Stage, And The Origin Of Language. 287 Appendix. 329 Index. 335 Footnotes . 387 [v] Dedication Dedicated To The Members Of The University Of Oxford, Both Resident And Non-Resident, To Whom I Am Indebted For Numerous Proofs Of Sympathy And Kindness During The Last Twelve Years, In Grateful Acknowledgment Of Their Generous Support On The 7th Of December, 1860. [vii] Preface. My Lectures on the Science of Language are here printed as I had prepared them in manuscript for the Royal Institution. When I came to deliver them, a considerable portion of what I had written had to be omitted; and, in now placing them before the public in a more complete form, I have gladly complied with a wish expressed by many of my hearers. As they are, they only form a short abstract of several Courses delivered from time to time in Oxford, and they do not pretend to be more than an introduction to a science far too comprehensive to be treated successfully in so small a compass.
    [Show full text]