Talk:Francis Ellingwood Abbot

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Biography / Science and Academia (Rated Stub-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the science and academia work group.
 
WikiProject Philosophy (Rated Stub-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Philosophy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of content related to philosophy on Wikipedia. If you would like to support the project, please visit the project page, where you can get more details on how you can help, and where you can join the general discussion about philosophy content on Wikipedia.
Stub-Class article Stub  This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Rev. Abbot and Hale v. Everett (N.H. 1868)[edit]

I added several paragraphs concerning the landmark case of Hale v. Everett, 53 N.H. 9 (1868), in which New Hampshire's highest court ruled that the Rev. Francis Ellingwood Abbot was doctrinally unsound and insufficiently Christian to serve his Unitarian congregation. I've included quotations drawn from the opinion for flavor, and added a contrasting laudatory quotation from Frederick Douglass - - to show that some deeply appreciated Abbot's work.

This information is based on research I did for an article published by the George Mason University Civil Rights Law Journal.

Eric Alan Isaacson 00:18, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Scientific Method[edit]

I have searched for some time now for the earliest sketch of the scientific method in its modern form. Abbot's description from Scientific Theism is the earliest I have so far:

"This method consists essentially in three distinct steps : (1) observation and experiment, (2) hypothesis, (3) verification by fresh observation..." (p. 60).

I have no idea if Abbot picked this up from another source, or condensed the method down to these steps from his own reading. --ChrisSteinbach (talk) 23:31, 11 February 2008 (UTC)