[Cz-biology] FW: Major misconception in "Biology" article
N.Rasmussen at unsw.edu.au
Wed Jan 2 14:22:25 CST 2008
I am afraid the complaint is justified. Preformationists like
Hartsoeker were illustrating their THEORY with homunculus drawings --
what they said you MIGHT be able to see if you had a better microscope.
There are other such problems in the site, but I have despaired about
changing any them. If you want historical accuracy, history of
biology has to be regarded as a separate area of expertise beyond
that of the biologists writing these pieces.
Nicolas Rasmussen, MA (Philosophy), MPhil (HPS), PhD (Biology)
School of History and Philosophy
University of New South Wales
Sydney NSW 2052
On 03/01/2008, at 5:04 AM, Larry Sanger wrote:
> All, please look into this complaint!
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Benedikt Hager [mailto:bhager at mac.com]
> Sent: Sunday, December 30, 2007 10:51 AM
> To: sanger at citizendium.org
> Subject: Major misconception in "Biology" article
> I'm sorry for writing directly to you, but I didn't find a way to
> contact any other editor without registering an account before.
> This paper by KA Hill reports quite the contrary about Hartsoeker's
> Homunculus of what the Citizendium article "biology" says:
> As far as I can tell, the CZ article seems to prolong a common, but
> nontheless incorrect interpretation of what Hartsoeker and
> Leeuwenhoek stated.
> Benedikt Hager
> Cz-biology mailing list
> Cz-biology at mail.citizendium.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Cz-biology