
Discussion to ‘Statistics in agricultural research’ by J.Wishart, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Supplement, 1, 26-61, 1934.
1930s
The causes of human variability. Eugenics Review 10, 213-220, 1918.
1910s–1920s
Discussion to ‘Statistics in agricultural research’ by J.Wishart, Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Supplement, 1, 26-61, 1934.
1930s
General System Theory (1968), 4. Advances in General Systems Theory
Note on the Use of this Book, p. xi-xii.
An Introduction To Probability Theory And Its Applications (Third Edition)
British Agricultural Bulletin 4, 217–218, 1951.
1950s
25 February 1933, in a letter to L. Hogben. Printed in Natural Selection, Heredity, and Eugenics, J.H.Bennett, Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1983, p. 218.
1930s
the "ideas of analysis" to which he returned, are those quoted above.
Ausdehnungslehre (1844)
The Ten Suggestions http://www.federalreserve.gov/newsevents/speech/bernanke20130602a.htm. Speech given at Baccalaureate Ceremony at Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey, June 2, 2013.
Source: Essays in the Philosophy of Language, 1967, p. 20-21
First Report, p. 34
U.S. Navy at War, 1941-1945: Official Reports to the Secretary of the Navy (1946)
Anarchism: Its Philosophy and Ideal (1896)
Context: Once a German jurist of great renown, Ihering, wanted to sum up the scientific work of his life and write a treatise, in which he proposed to analyze the factors that preserve social life in society. "Purpose in Law" (Der Zweck im Rechte), such is the title of that book, which enjoys a well-deserved reputation.
He made an elaborate plan of his treatise, and, with much erudition, discussed both coercive factors which are used to maintain society: wagedom and the different forms of coercion which are sanctioned by law. At the end of his work he reserved two paragraphs only to mention the two non-coercive factors — the feeling of duty and the feeling of mutual sympathy — to which he attached little importance, as might be expected from a writer in law.
But what happened? As he went on analyzing the coercive factors he realized their insufficiency. He consecrated a whole volume to their analysis, and the result was to lessen their importance! When he began the last two paragraphs, when he began to reflect upon the non-coercive factors of society, he perceived, on the contrary, their immense, outweighing importance; and instead of two paragraphs, he found himself obliged to write a second volume, twice as large as the first, on these two factors: voluntary restraint and mutual help; and yet, he analyzed but an infinitesimal part of these latter — those which result from personal sympathy — and hardly touched free agreement, which results from social institutions.