{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01822079314040729, 'fraction_numerical': 0.00857449088960343, 'mean_word_length': 5.397260273972603, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Scientific Method and Prose Style in the Early Royal Society

This article discusses two conflicts occurring during the first decade of the Royal Society (1660–1670). One conflict concerned the proper method of scientific experimentation, the other the proper writing style for communicating scientific knowledge. Following the method proposed by taxonomists, language would be a vehicle for representing the order of reality in its undisturbed state. Following the method proposed by conjecturalists, language would be a means for constructing a theory and arguing for its validity. Members of the Society were divided over these crucial questions, as evident in scientific documents of the period as well as in Thomas Sprat's History of the Royal Society. Parallels to this division are present in contemporary issues in technical writing, and this article closes by discussing some implications for teaching, practice, and theory.