'Wallace was an outsider, so it's no wonder we don't remember him as a great scientist. He didn't limit his research to proper scientific subjects. Discuss.
Title: 'Wallace was an outsider, so it's no wonder we don't remember him as a great scientist. He didn't limit his research to proper scientific subjects. Discuss.
Category: /History
Details: Words: 1197 | Pages: 4 (approximately 235 words/page)
'Wallace was an outsider, so it's no wonder we don't remember him as a great scientist. He didn't limit his research to proper scientific subjects. Discuss.
Category: /History
Details: Words: 1197 | Pages: 4 (approximately 235 words/page)
Science can be defined as 'The observation, identification, description, experimental investigation, and theoretical explanation of phenomena.' And a scientist as someone who has an expert knowledge of one or more sciences. Today Wallace would be considered a great scientist according to these definitions. He came up with the same theories on evolution as Darwin. So why will Darwin be remembered as the person whose theories changed our view on evolution while Wallace faded into …showed first 75 words of 1197 total…
You are viewing only a small portion of the paper.
Please login or register to access the full copy.
Please login or register to access the full copy.
…showed last 75 words of 1197 total…track' subjects which were within the boundaries of proper scientific research and on the other hand there was the 'wrong track' .Wallace was defiantly on the 'wrong track' The modern resource historians use is called 'contextual' where nothing is ruled out, nothing is beyond the pale. Had Wallace and his scientific research been judged by today's contextual standards it is more than likely he would have been regarded as a great scientist by the establishment.
