“
In every other instance, however, the natural historian thinks himself obliged to collect facts, not to offer conjectures. When he treats of any particular species of animals, he supposes, that their present dispositions and instincts are the same they originally had, and that their present manner of life is a continuance of their first destination. He admits, that his knowledge of the material system of the world consists in a collection of facts, or at most, in general tenets derived from particular observations and experiments. It is only in what relates to himself, and in matters the most important, and the most easily known, that he substitutes hypothesis instead of reality, and confounds the provinces of imagination and reason, of poetry and science. 去书内
”

  • 用户615157 用户615157

    In my opinion, concerning history, natural historians hold a static perspective since they only base their assumptions or hypothesis on facts and observations that they can relate to with their own experience. Well, it displays a scientific and rational attitude, however, I suppose that they overlook a lot of important facts that are beyond their observations.

    2021-06-03 喜欢(0) 回复(0)