Some Like It Hot...Author(s): Henry C. LinkSource: The Scientific Monthly, Vol. 62, No. 6 (Jun., 1946), p. 563Published by: American Association for the Advancement of ScienceStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/18847 .

Accessed: 07/05/2014 21:10

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

.

American Association for the Advancement of Science is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve andextend access to The Scientific Monthly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.136 on Wed, 7 May 2014 21:10:28 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

COMMENTS AND CRITIC]:SMS 563

Thanks, Mr. Wormser! I was startled to see in the April number of

THE SCIENTIFIC MONTHLY in the most interest- ing article by Mr. A. Boyajian the letter from Cotton Mather to John Higginson. This letter has been repeatedly shown to be a pure forgery. In T. J. Holmes' Cotton Mather Bibiliography, pages (1299) to 1300, you will find a full ac- count; of this hoax in which are reprinted the remarks of 'Mr. Samuel A.. Green at the 1908 meeting of the Massachusetts Historical Society.

This spurious letter perennially reappears, gen- erally in learned publications, in spite of repeated published expos6es.-RICHA1RD S. WORMSER.

Somne Like It Hot . .. May I coingratulate you and your associates

on the manner in which you have broadened the range) of intereXst of THE SCIENTIFIC MONTHLY.

In the last; [August] issue I was particularly impressed by the article on religious truth. In the current issue the artlicles by Black and Weltfish are especially impressive.

Naturally, THE SCIENTIFIC MONTHLY must have articles which are predominantly scientific and experimental. However, nothing in the field of science is more important today, it seems to me, tlhan the discussion of values as contrasted with facts, morals as contrasted with materials, and idealism as contrasted with pragmatism.

If the ato:mic bomb has not made this obvi- ous, then there is no hope for the human race. The atomic bomb represents a collection of facts; the decisions as to how the bomb is to be made use of must be based on an agreement in respect to fundamental values. Therefore, it seems to me that such discussions as those referred to in the MONTHLY, and other articles on religion and morals written from a scien- tific viewpoinrt, are highly appropriate f or the MONTHLY.-HENRY C. LINK.

Some Like It Cold ... I subscribed to THE SCIENTIFIC MONTHLY with

the hope and pleasant expectation of reading a magazine comnpletely devoted to science. It is with deep regret that I see that I made a mis- take. Unless you want deliberately to deceive your readers you must change the title of the magazine to something like: Religion and Sci- ence, or Bible Stories. ...

If you continue to disgrace the pages of your magazine with metaphysical rubbish I will dis- continue my subscription.

Yours for a real Scientific Monthly, J. M. MARTINEZ

A Soft Answer... Dear Professor Transeau:

Thank you for sending me a copy of your letter to Dr. Campbell and f o r giving me an opportunity to reply. First, as to some matters of fact:

(1) In my article [Basic English for Science, March SM] there was no designation of any particular book to which my student 's letter re- ferred. I do not know what book she had in mind. It might have been any botany text avail- able to OSU students. If you feel that a book in which you are interested is in question, you are assuming an onus which was not int;ended. You say, quite correctly, that your text and teaching methods are not properly described in my student's letter. Why, then, call the:m into question? The quotation, whieli you designate as "alleged," is not taken from your book.

(2) The implication in your use of "pur- loined"I is unjust. The letter was used with the student 's permission. I believe that you will agree that in withholding the student's name, I was only acting with ordinary discretion.

(3) I chose a specimen of Lyell 's prose be- cause it is not extremely technical. I could easily have found specimens more in need of simplification; to choose these would have. seemed like begging the question.

(4) Basic English versions hyave been made of many of the Englis-h classics, ineluding one of the three you mention. These versions are in- tended to serve as introductions for Basic read- ers whose mother tongue is not English.

There remain the two questionLs as to whether the language of some science texts might be simplified and whether Basic can help in this. These questions are matters of opinion, and I do not need to add here to what I have already stated. I do feel, however, that the increasing demand for simplification made by our students is being amply supported by maLy scientists and technicians. One MONTHLY subscriber wrote to me saying, in part: "Your article in the March SCIENTIFIC MONTHLY ought to be required read- ing f or a good many of the the people who write scientific books and articles.'' Another: "II think that the point which you make should be given serious consideration by all writers in science, and I am pleased that the editors of SM have endorsed it." I shall be glad to open to you, Professor Transeau, my complete corre- spondence file on this article.

Thanking you again and assuring you of my personal esteem, I remain,

S:incerely yours, Tom IBURNS HABER

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.136 on Wed, 7 May 2014 21:10:28 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions