We are surrounded by people’s names, celebrations of their lifelong contributions to the world of science and maths. Euler’s formula, Fermat’s last theorem, and the Higgs boson are all examples of key discoveries after the people who discovered them. But should the scientific community continue to do so?
On the one hand, it gives scientists lifelong recognition for their work. Regardless of whether you do physics or not, almost everyone recognises the words “Einstein’s theory of relativity” and E = mc2. Many scientists devote their life to their field and in naming discoveries in their honour, the wider world understands the hard work and dedication that went into those discoveries. In the same way that we have authors’ names on books and signatures on art, naming scientific discoveries after the people who discovered them, prevents people from becoming ignorant of the history that predates them.
However,
Oon
the other hand, this is undermined by the fact that some scientists have
elected to name discoveries after others. For example, William Herschel, the
man who is credited with discovering Uranus, originally named the planet Georgium
Sidus (‘Georgian Star’) after King George III and furthermore Euler, who
discovered Young’s modulus among other discoveries, elected to name it after
Thomas Young. Both actions imply that their ability to contribute to the wider
scientific community is sufficient without needing to name their discovery
after them.
Another argument against the practice of naming discoveries with people’s names is that people in history often share views that are the products of their time[NH1] . Thomas Edison, inventor of the lightbulb, electrocuted an elephant in a demonstration of the dangers of AC current. This animal cruelty was a deliberate stunt to scare the public away from AC current which had been invented by Nikola[NH2] Tesla and in promotion of DC current invented by his own company. Whilst now this would inspire outrage, this was a successful campaign and convinced the public that AC current was a dangerous concept.
However, restricting the crediting of scientist on their scientific contributions based on public opinion raises ethical questions about free speech. Werner von Braun was a member of the Nazi party and worked with the German army during the Second World War. Regardless NASA calls him “one of the most important rocket developers” and it is through his work that humans were able to land on the moon. Restrictions on who is allowed to work in science and by extension who should be credited publicly for discoveries can result in a slowing of progress.
More importantly, a scientific discovery is rarely due to the hard work of a singular individual. Firstly, the presence of servants and women performing a larger proportion of domestic labour resulted in scientists, who were predominately men, being able to have the free time to conduct experiments, write papers and think about their contributions. By only crediting the person who appears to have contributed the most, we are erasing the sacrifices made by others to get them to a position where that discovery could have been made.
More directly, women who assisted in the discovery of scientific progress are often disregarded in favour of their male counterparts. It is speculated that Einstein’s first wife, Mileva Marić, contributed to his first work, and never gained credit for it. Whilst there is no concrete proof, testimonies from close friends and other scientists from the time do imply Marić’s involvement. Whilst a singular example, it demonstrates the possibility of further erasure of women’s contributions and undermines the reasoning that naming a scientific principle after the person who discovered it provides recognition for those who discovered it, as in doing so it removes recognition for others.
Finally, Stigler’s law of Eponymy states that “no scientific result is named for the scientist who discovered it.” Stigler’s law is itself an example of Stigler’s law, with Stigler crediting Robert Merton for the law. Another example is Newton’s first and second laws of motion. Newton’s first law can be traced back to Aristotle, but the principle was also discovered by Galileo, Hooke and Huygens, all of whom predate Issac Newton. Regardless, Newton’s law of motion remains in Newton’s name.
Whilst discoveries carrying the names of those who discovered them has been one of the common standards so far, it is not the only option, gravity, comes from the Latin word gravitas (which in turn has a more ancient root word) meaning heavy. Alternatively, for something even more simple, the telescope being built in Cerro Armazones in Chile’s Atacama desert, set to be the largest optical telescope in the world will be called the Extremely Large Telescope.
Ultimately, the naming of scientific principles after people in an attempt to provide them with greater credit is ineffective, partially as it often results in the crediting of the latest scientist who worked on the principles instead of the scientist who came up with them. It furthermore erases smaller contributors, implying that their work was less important to the discovery and the entire aim is undermined by scientists like Euler electing to name discoveries after others. Finally, as countless other discoveries have proved, there are alternatives.
[NH1]Are often products of their time? Of course exist in the context of their time?
[NH2]Good name
