Abstract
PROF. KARL PEARSON'S presidential address to the Anthropological Section of the British Association at the recent Cardiff meeting sounded a note of challenge which it is not usual to hear from the chair. Yet perhaps few of his audience were inclined to agree with him in this case that “a Daniel had no right to issue judgment from the high seat of the feast.” In science, perhaps even more than in other departments of human affairs, criticism is the breath of life, and perfection, if it were attainable, might prove perilously akin to stagnation.
Article PDF
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Methods and Aims of Anthropology. Nature 106, 233–234 (1920). https://doi.org/10.1038/106233a0
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/106233a0