Nomenclature. Quotes (1 quote)
One subject, however I shall insist upon; that is, to explode the Linnæan obscenity in his characters of the Bivalves; not only for their licentiousness, but also that they are in no ways the parts expressed. Science should be chaste and delicate. Ribaldry at times has been passed for wit; but Linnæus alone passes it for terms of science. His merit in this part of natural history is, in my opinion, much debased thereby; and I can compare these his terms only to Spintriæ [Roman erotic bronze tokens], in a valuable collection of Roman coins. I therefore with due submission recommend to that otherwise great naturalist, to change them, and expunge this reproachable obscenity from his works.
From Preface to Elements of Conchology or, An introduction to the Knowledge of Shells (1776), iv-v. [Costa is offended by nomenclature adopted by Linnaeus for features of the opening of certain bivalve shells. Based on corresponding parts of surface appearance, Linnaeus used terms distinctive to human female anatomy. Costa was determined to eliminate the indelicate terms. —Webmaster]
In science it often happens that scientists say, 'You know that's a really good argument; my position is mistaken,' and then they would actually change their minds and you never hear that old view from them again. They really do it. It doesn't happen as often as it should, because scientists are human and change is sometimes painful. But it happens every day. I cannot recall the last time something like that happened in politics or religion.
(1987) -- 
