K. Pearson to F. Galton, 3rd March [1902].- External URL
- Correspondence Details
-
Sent From (Definite): Karl PearsonSent To (Definite): Sir Francis GaltonDate: 3 Mar 1902
- Current Holder(s)
-
Holder (Definite): University College London: Special Collections
- No links match your filters. Clear Filters
-
Sent fromKarl Pearson
3 Mar 1902
Description:
‘...
Now as to examination marks. My own claims I find very often give curves like sunshine observations. [diag: inverted normal distribution curve] That is to say there is a minimum frequency in the second class [i.e. middle grade]. I take it that this is due to work or no work. A lad either works & does well or does not work & does badly. I have over & over again, especially among the engineers, had distributions of this kind. I fancy you will find them also in public competition examinations. A man knows he is good & tries hard for the post: a man is a fool & does not know that it is perfectly idle his trying. The middle man knows he is mediocre and has sufficient wit to stand aside [so] does not enter the contest. I have seen this certainly in dog shows, in dogs like fox-terriers of which I used to know something. A number of excellent dogs & a number of very bad dogs & no mediocrity. Better dogs running about just outside the yard than many exhibited, but owners too wise to send them. I think it’s probably so with cattle; a farmer has a beast which is really third rate, but better than he ever had himself before or his immediate neighbours have ever had. He sends it to a big show, simply because he is ignorant of the “cracks” – it will be there compared with the moderately good beast... [missing page?]...
Bateson wrote to me saying it was pitiable to see “a great man’s great work” mangled in the way Weldon had mangled Mendel’s. He also said that Weldon was a biologist & went into these matters with his eyes open, bit that as I was not a biologist, and seemed to him in earnest, he would warn me of the error & foolishness of my ways, or words to that effect. Weldon is past salvation, but I may yet be saved, if I accept the views he, Bateson, himself takes! I have written a reply on the “Fundamental Conceptions of Biology” for Biometrika, which I fear is rather hot, but my temper is a good deal up, and I know that Weldon spent much time & thought over the Mendel paper, and I believe did him justice.
...’
-
Sent toSir Francis Galton
3 Mar 1902
Description:
‘...
Now as to examination marks. My own claims I find very often give curves like sunshine observations. [diag: inverted normal distribution curve] That is to say there is a minimum frequency in the second class [i.e. middle grade]. I take it that this is due to work or no work. A lad either works & does well or does not work & does badly. I have over & over again, especially among the engineers, had distributions of this kind. I fancy you will find them also in public competition examinations. A man knows he is good & tries hard for the post: a man is a fool & does not know that it is perfectly idle his trying. The middle man knows he is mediocre and has sufficient wit to stand aside [so] does not enter the contest. I have seen this certainly in dog shows, in dogs like fox-terriers of which I used to know something. A number of excellent dogs & a number of very bad dogs & no mediocrity. Better dogs running about just outside the yard than many exhibited, but owners too wise to send them. I think it’s probably so with cattle; a farmer has a beast which is really third rate, but better than he ever had himself before or his immediate neighbours have ever had. He sends it to a big show, simply because he is ignorant of the “cracks” – it will be there compared with the moderately good beast... [missing page?]...
Bateson wrote to me saying it was pitiable to see “a great man’s great work” mangled in the way Weldon had mangled Mendel’s. He also said that Weldon was a biologist & went into these matters with his eyes open, bit that as I was not a biologist, and seemed to him in earnest, he would warn me of the error & foolishness of my ways, or words to that effect. Weldon is past salvation, but I may yet be saved, if I accept the views he, Bateson, himself takes! I have written a reply on the “Fundamental Conceptions of Biology” for Biometrika, which I fear is rather hot, but my temper is a good deal up, and I know that Weldon spent much time & thought over the Mendel paper, and I believe did him justice.
...’
-
