Lederberg J. "Ricki Lewis' Law" SCIENTIST, 18 (15): 11-11 AUG 2 2004

[Eugene Garfield]

E-mail Address: jsl at mail.rockefeller.edu


Author(s):    Lederberg, J
Title:        "Ricki Lewis' law"
Source:       SCIENTIST, 18 (15): 11-11 AUG 2 2004

Language: English   Document Type: Letter

Addresses: Rockefeller Univ, Raymond & Beverly Sackler Fdn, New York, NY
10021 USA

Reprint Address: Lederberg, J, Rockefeller Univ, Raymond & Beverly Sackler
Fdn, New York, NY 10021 USA.

E-mail Address: jsl at mail.rockefeller.edu

Cited References: GARFIELD E, WHATS IN NAME EPONYM.
LEWIS R, 2004, SCIENTIST, V18, P64.
STIGLER SM, 1980, T NEW YORK ACAD SCI, V39, P147.

Cited Reference Count: 3
Times Cited: 0

Publisher: SCIENTIST INC

Publisher Address: 3535 MARKET ST, SUITE 200, PHILADELPHIA, PA 19104-3385 USA
ISSN: 0890-3670
ISI Document Delivery No.: 842QG



http://www.the-scientist.com/yr2004/aug/letters4_040802.html

The Scientist
Volume 18 | Issue 15 | 10 | Aug. 2, 2004


'Ricki Lewis' Law'

The Closing Bell for July 5 was headlined as a lament for the passing of
eponyms in science.1 It is unlikely that we will soon dispose of Mendel's
Laws or Avogadro's Number. If scientists are jealous about being properly
cited in bibliographies, that is a large step towards an eponymic tradition.
There may be less of the natural history and surprise observation in science
today, but there is no lack of theoretical synthesis that might invite the
dignity of being inscribed as a "Law."

Self-anointed "Laws" are likely to attach to matters the author is uncertain
about, hence need dogmatic assertion. There is no Lederberg's Law in print
of which I'm aware; in my correspondence I do find: (October 2001) "An
aphorism that is sometimes called (one of) Lederberg's laws: Knowledge-based
systems are up against a stonewall until computer programs can read the
literature firsthand; and the latter will have to be recrafted to enable
that." I suppose that's a hope and prayer.

Perhaps The Scientist would consider a contest to collect nominations, and
lend currency to a whole new catalog of eponyms, rendering Lewis' Law a
self-negating prophecy, by calling attention to the prospects of void.

Contestants in such a game should be reminded of two landmark papers. Steve
Stigler, the renowned historian of statistics, proposed "Stigler's Law,"2
that eponyms never attach to a true discoverer. It might be said that all
grandiose generalizations are false, including this one, and Stigler may
admit some exceptions. He does not elaborate who should be designated the
true author of Stigler's Law, unless he had in mind the late Bob Merton for
his insistence that most discoveries are multiples.

Then, 20 years ago, Gene Garfield, in "What's in a name: The eponymic route
to immortality,"3 gives an entertaining recapitulation of eponomies, with
many examples.

Joshua Lederberg
Raymond and Beverly Sackler Foundation Scholar
Rockefeller University
jsl at mail.rockefeller.edu

References
1. R. Lewis, "In memory of eponyms," The Scientist, 18[13]:64, July 5, 2004
<http://www.the-scientist.com/yr2004/jul/close_040705.html>.

2. S.M. Stigler, "Stigler's law of eponymy," Trans NY Acad Sci, 239:147-57,
1980.

3. E. Garfield, "What's in a name: The eponymic route to immortality,"
www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v6p384y1983.pdf
<http://www.garfield.library.upenn.edu/essays/v6p384y1983.pdf>