Wikipedia

Multiple discovery

"Parallel discovery" redirects here. For the thought process, seeParallel thinking.

The concept ofmultiple discovery(also known assimultaneous invention)[1][self-published source]is the hypothesis that most scientific discoveries and inventions are made independently and more or less simultaneously by multiple scientists and inventors.[2][page needed]The concept of multiple discovery opposes a traditional view—the"heroic theory" of invention and discovery.[not verified in body]Multiple discovery is analogous toconvergent evolutioninbiological evolution.[according to whom?][clarification needed]

Multiples

edit

WhenNobel laureatesare announced annually—especially in physics, chemistry, physiology, medicine, and economics—increasingly, in the given field, rather than just a single laureate, there are two, or the maximally permissible three, who often have independently made the same discovery.[according to whom?][citation needed] Historians and sociologists have remarked the occurrence, inscience,of "multiple independent discovery".Robert K. Mertondefined such "multiples" as instances in which similardiscoveriesare made by scientists working independently of each other.[3][4]Merton contrasted a "multiple" with a "singleton" —a discovery that has been made uniquely by a single scientist or group of scientists working together.[5]As Merton said, "Sometimes the discoveries are simultaneous or almost so; sometimes a scientist will make a new discovery which, unknown to him, somebody else has made years before."[4][page needed][6]

Commonly cited examples of multiple independent discovery are the 17th-century independent formulation ofcalculusbyIsaac Newton,Gottfried Wilhelm Leibnizand others;[7][page needed]the 18th-century discovery ofoxygenbyCarl Wilhelm Scheele,Joseph Priestley,Antoine Lavoisierand others;[citation needed]and thetheory of evolutionofspecies,independently advanced in the 19th century byCharles DarwinandAlfred Russel Wallace.[8][better source needed][better source needed]What holds for discoveries, also goes forinventions.[according to whom?][citation needed]Examples are theblast furnace(invented independently in China, Europe and Africa),[citation needed]thecrossbow(invented independently in China, Greece, Africa, northern Canada, and the Baltic countries),[citation needed],magnetism(discovered independently in Greece, China, and India)[citation needed],thecomputer mouse(both rolling andoptical),powered flight,and thetelephone.

Multiple independent discovery, however, is not limited to only a few historic instances involving giants of scientific research. Merton believed that it is multiple discoveries, rather than unique ones, that represent thecommonpattern in science.[9]

Mechanism

edit

Multiple discoveries in the history of science provide evidence forevolutionarymodels of science and technology, such asmemetics(the study of self-replicating units of culture),evolutionary epistemology(which applies the concepts ofbiological evolutionto study of the growth of human knowledge), andcultural selection theory(which studies sociological and cultural evolution in a Darwinian manner).[citation needed]

Arecombinant-DNA-inspired "paradigmof paradigms "has been posited, that describes a mechanism of" recombinant conceptualization ".[10]This paradigm predicates that a newconceptarises through the crossing of pre-existing concepts andfacts.[10][11]This is what is meant when one says that a scientist or artist has been "influenced by" another—etymologically,that a concept of the latter's has "flowed into" the mind of the former.[10]Not every new concept so formed will be viable: adaptingsocial DarwinistHerbert Spencer's phrase, only the fittest concepts survive.[10]

Multiple independent discovery and invention, like discovery and invention generally, have been fostered by the evolution of means ofcommunication:roads,vehicles,sailing vessels,writing,printing,institutions ofeducation,reliablepostal services,[12]telegraphy,andmass media,including theinternet.[according to whom?][citation needed]Gutenberg's invention of printing (which itself involved a number of discrete inventions) substantially facilitated the transition from theMiddle Agestomodern times.[citation needed]All these communication developments havecatalyzedand accelerated the process of recombinant conceptualization,[clarification needed]and thus also of multiple independent discovery.[citation needed]

Multiple independent discoveriesshow an increased incidence beginning in the 17th century. This may accord with the thesis of British philosopherA.C. Graylingthat the 17th century was crucial in the creation of the modernworld view,freed from the shackles of religion, the occult, and uncritical faith in the authority ofAristotle.Grayling speculates that Europe'sThirty Years' War(1618–1648), with the concomitant breakdown of authority, made freedom of thought and open debate possible, so that "modern science... rests on the heads of millions of dead." He also notes "the importance of the development of a reliablepostal service... in enabling savants... to be in scholarly communication.... [T]he cooperative approach, first recommended byFrancis Bacon,was essential to making science open topeer reviewand public verification, and not just a matter of the lone [individual] issuing... idiosyncratic pronouncements. "[12]

Humanities

edit

Theparadigmof recombinant conceptualization (see above)—more broadly, of recombinant occurrences—that explains multiple discovery in science and the arts, also elucidates the phenomenon ofhistoric recurrence,wherein similar events are noted in thehistoriesof countries widely separated in time and geography. It is the recurrence ofpatternsthat lends a degree ofprognosticpower—and, thus, additional scientific validity—to the findings ofhistory.[13][page needed]

The arts

edit

Lamb and Easton, and others, have argued that science andartare similar with regard to multiple discovery.[2][page needed][10]When two scientists independently make the same discovery, their papers are not word-for-word identical, but the core ideas in the papers are the same; likewise, two novelists may independently write novels with the same core themes, though their novels are not identical word-for-word.[2][page needed]

Civility

edit

AfterIsaac NewtonandGottfried Wilhelm Leibnizhad exchanged information on their respective systems ofcalculusin the 1670s, Newton in the first edition of hisPrincipia(1687), in ascholium,apparently accepted Leibniz's independent discovery of calculus. In 1699, however, a Swiss mathematician suggested to Britain'sRoyal Societythat Leibniz had borrowed his calculus from Newton. In 1705 Leibniz, in an anonymous review of Newton'sOpticks,implied that Newton'sfluxions(Newton's term fordifferential calculus) were an adaptation of Leibniz's calculus. In 1712 the Royal Society appointed a committee to examine the documents in question; the same year, the Society published a report, written by Newton himself, asserting his priority. Soon after Leibniz died in 1716, Newton denied that his own 1687Principiascholium"allowed [Leibniz] the invention of thecalculus differentialisindependently of my own "; and the third edition of Newton'sPrincipia(1726) omitted the tell-tale scholium. It is now accepted that Newton and Leibniz discovered calculus independently of each other.[14]

In another classic case of multiple discovery, the two discoverers showed morecivility.By June 1858Charles Darwinhad completed over two-thirds of hisOn the Origin of Specieswhen he received a startling letter from a naturalist,Alfred Russel Wallace,13 years his junior, with whom he had corresponded. The letter summarized Wallace'stheory of natural selection,with conclusions identical to Darwin's own. Darwin turned for advice to his friendCharles Lyell,the foremost geologist of the day. Lyell proposed that Darwin and Wallace prepare a joint communication to the scientific community. Darwin being preoccupied with his mortally ill youngest son, Lyell enlisted Darwin's closest friend,Joseph Hooker,director ofKew Gardens,and together on 1 July 1858 they presented to theLinnean Societya joint paper that brought together Wallace's abstract with extracts from Darwin's earlier, 1844 essay on the subject. The paper was also published that year in the Society's journal. Neither the public reading of the joint paper nor its publication attracted interest; but Wallace, "admirably free from envy or jealousy," had been content to remain in Darwin's shadow.[8][better source needed]

See also

edit

References and notes

edit
  1. ^Griswold, Martin (2012-11-25)."Are Inventions Inevitable? Simultaneous Invention and the Incremental Nature of Discovery"(self-published blog).The Long Nose: Technology and the Economy.Retrieved17 April2016.
  2. ^abcLamb, David; Easton, S. M. (1984). "Originality in art and science [chap. 9]".Multiple Discovery: The Pattern of Scientific Progress.Amersham: Avebury Publishing.ISBN978-0861270255.[full citation needed]
  3. ^Merton, Robert K. (1963).Resistance to the Systematic Study of Multiple Discoveries in Science.Vol. 4. pp.237–282.doi:10.1017/S0003975600000801.ISBN9780226520704.S2CID145650007.{{cite book}}:|journal=ignored (help)Reprinted inMerton, Robert K.,The Sociology of Science,op. cit., pp. 371–382.
  4. ^abMerton, Robert K.(1973).The Sociology of Science: Theoretical and Empirical Investigations.Chicago, IL, USA: The University of Chicago Press.ISBN9780226520919.[full citation needed]
  5. ^Merton, Robert K.(1996).Sztompka, Piotr(ed.).On Social Structure and Science.Chicago, IL, USA: The University of Chicago Press. p. 307.[full citation needed]
  6. ^Sommer has introduced the term "nulltiple" to describe a scientific discovery that is suppressed or blocked from publication or dissemination via normal scientific channels, seeSommer, Toby J. (2001)."Bahramdipity and Nulltiple Scientific Discoveries"(PDF).Science and Engineering Ethics.7(1):77–104.doi:10.1007/s11948-001-0025-7.PMID11214387.S2CID23807206..Per Sommer, nulltiple discoveries are often made serendipitously as part of an otherwise directed research program.[verification needed]As such, they are less likely to be re-discovered by others as is the case with many multiples. Sometimes nulltiples do eventually come to light, but often within circumstances of historical research rather than as a primary scientific disclosure.[verification needed]
  7. ^Hall, A. Rupert (1980).Philosophers at War: The Quarrel between Newton and Leibniz.New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.ISBN978-0521227322.[full citation needed]
  8. ^abReeve, Tori (2009).Down House: the Home of Charles Darwin.London, ENG:English Heritage.pp.40–41.
  9. ^Merton, Robert K., "Singletons and Multiples in Scientific Discovery: a Chapter in the Sociology of Science",Proceedings of the American Philosophical Society,105: 470–86, 1961. Reprinted inMerton, Robert K.,The Sociology of Science,op. cit., pp. 343–70.
  10. ^abcdeKasparek, Christopher(1994)."Prus'Pharaoh:the Creation of a Historical Novel "(article).The Polish Review.39(1):45–50.JSTOR25778765.
  11. ^An example of a concept arising via the crossing of previously unrelated concepts may beepidemiologistRob Wallace's conclusion, from studying concepts inhistory,sociology,andpolitical economy,that "Thesocial sciencesare utterly critical to understand[ing] how things [such aszoonoticviruses,e.g. the virus causing theCOVID–19 pandemic] evolve at themolecularlevel. "Eamon Whalen," The Man Who Saw It Coming: Rob Wallace warned us thatindustrial agriculturecould cause a deadlypandemic,but no one listened. Until now. "(article on Rob Wallace and his books,Big Farms Make Big Flu: Dispatches on Influenza, Agribusiness, and the Nature of ScienceandDead Epidemiologists: On the Origins of COVID-19),The Nation,vol. 313, no. 5 (September 6/13, 2021), pp. 14–19. (p. 17.)
  12. ^abColin McGinn,"Groping Toward the Mind" (review ofGeorge Makari,Soul Machine: The Invention of the Modern Mind,Norton, 656 pp.; andA.C. Grayling,The Age of Genius: The Seventeenth Century and the Birth of the Modern Mind,Bloomsbury, 351 pp.),The New York Review of Books,vol. LXIII, no. 11 (June 23, 2016), p. 68.
  13. ^Trompf, G.W. (1979).The Idea of Historical Recurrence in Western Thought, from Antiquity to the Reformation.Berkeley, CA, USA: University of California Press.ISBN978-0520034792.[full citation needed]
  14. ^Durant, Will;Durant, Ariel(1963).The Age of Louis XIV: A History of European Civilization in the Period of Pascal, Molière, Cromwell, Milton, Peter the Great, Newton, and Spinoza, 1648-1715.The Story of Civilization: Part VIII.New York, NY: Simon and Schuster. pp.532–34.

Further reading

edit
edit
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Multiple_discovery&oldid=1275869787"