Letter | Published:

Mendelism and Evolution

Nature volume 114, page 10 (05 July 1924) | Download Citation

Subjects

Abstract

MR. HUXLEY seems to have missed (NATURE, June 7) the main point I wished to emphasise, namely, that while criticism of one investigator's views by another is always valuable, it is stretching the point to attempt to define the grounds on which an opinion may be advanced. It is natural for a man who has studied a group of phenomena from a certain viewpoint to formulate an opinion as the result of his studies. If the admitted limitations of a paper were appreciated, together with the difficulties under which some zoologists work, I imagine they would be free from the type of criticism under discussion. That Dr. Annandale's opinions may have been strengthened or modified by experimental data I do not deny, and if Mr. Huxley's letter directs attention to the neglect of experimental work in India it will have served a useful purpose; but, as I said, it is expecting too much to require a man already engaged in studies so diverse as Dr. Annandale's to supply the need himself.

Access optionsAccess options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Author information

Affiliations

  1. London, June 12.

    • CEDRIC DOVER

Authors

  1. Search for CEDRIC DOVER in:

About this article

Publication history

Published

DOI

https://doi.org/10.1038/114010a0

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.