Skip to main content

Why Write This Book?

  • Chapter
  • 54 Accesses

Abstract

If I may be permitted the luxury of beginning a book by sharing its purpose and contents with the reader, I take that luxury gladly. My topic, strabismus, has fascinated and perplexed me (among many others) for over a quarter of a century. Often in despair of ever understanding anything about the topic, I have put aside inquiry into the many questions patients present when I examine them and have resorted to a mechanical way of thinking about the condition that persists in its worst form as the sterile dogmatism—“if the eyes are in turn them out, and if they are out turn them in.” But my demon will not go away. And so it is that I come to write this book.

The search for truth is in one way very difficult and in another very easy, for it is obvious that no man can master it fully nor miss it wholly, but each adds to our knowledge of nature and from the facts all assembled, there arises a certain grandeur. Aristotle

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

References

  • Ross WD, ed. Aristotle’s Metaphysics. Oxford: Clarendon Press; 1924: Vol. 1, Book 2, Chap. 1, B993A3-B24.

    Google Scholar 

  • R.C Hilbert, by Constance Reed. New York/Heidelberg/Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 1970:1–244. Of the many contributions Hilbery made to mathematics, his 1900 lecture stands out as a masterpiece. Most of us are familiar with Goedel’s theorem which disproved one of Hilbert’s most cherished hypotheses, namely, that mathematics was internally consistent and logical and could be derived from first principles. His questions are still with us today and serve as a fertile source of work for young mathematicians. The lecture itself was printed as “Mathematische Probleme” in Ann Phys Math 1900:44–63, 213–237.

    Google Scholar 

  • I. Newton, General Scholium of Principia Mathematica, 1713, as cited by Jacobson M. Developmental Neurobiology. New York: Plenum Press; 1978:344. In Newton’s time hypotheses abounded, and alchemy was considered as real as the infant science of chemistry. Newton’s dictum opposed the idle generation of hypotheses that could not be tested.

    Google Scholar 

  • G.Westheimer In:GLennerstrand, von Noorden GK, ECCampos, eds. Strabismus and Amblyopia. New York: Plenum Press; 1988: Chap. 33, 413–416. Gerald Westheimer is right in carefully separating hypotheses in the physical sciences with their rigor and mathematical formalism as opposed to those in the biological sciences. He is also correct, I believe, in stating that strabismus does not have a theory worthy of the name. But see also in this regard, Crick FW, What Mad Pursuit, New York: Basic Books; 1988: Chap. 10, 108–115, on the limits of biological hypotheses and the inherent variability of all outcomes of biological experiments, even when they are done correctly, as by physicists such as Crick!

    Google Scholar 

  • Popper K . As cited by Heisenberg W. Traditions in Science. New York: Seabury Press; 1983:125. Popper, the philosopher of science, has neatly placed limits on the value of any scientific hypothesis — it’s only as good as its last affirmation

    Google Scholar 

  • PD Medawar. Induction and Intuition in Scientific Thought. Philadelphia: American Philosophical Society; 1969. It is useful to read this deeply insightful work in conjunction with Heisenberg’s work cited earlier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Von Monakaw K . As cited by Pasik P, Pasik T. In: BenderM, ed. Oculomotor System. New York: Hoeber Medical Division, Harper & Row; 1961:63. Von Monakaw’s statement is perhaps more true and has more anatomical bases than when he made it. Such is the function of the intuition of genius.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1991 Springer-Verlag New York Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Flynn, J.T. (1991). Why Write This Book?. In: Strabismus A Neurodevelopmental Approach. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3058-8_1

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-3058-8_1

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-1-4612-7779-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4612-3058-8

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics