Social Darwinism and English thought. The interaction between biological and social theory

feature which "today has no place in the pathology of coronary disease", while it dia not even mention the coronary vessels, which play "a decisive role" in the disease Leibowitz claims to have diagnosed. In his retrospective diagnosis, therefore, Leibowitz has to ignore evidence which is given, and invent evidence which is not given. Just how great a discordance is required between our medical categories and those of eighteenth-century physicians before we will learn to abandon this fruitless game? Our categories and their categories are quite simply incommensurable. All in all, this is an interesting set of articles, the best of which are thematically related to Lindeboom's own interests. We await the next volume, this time celebrating his eightieth birthday. Andrew Cunningham Wellcome Unit for the History of Medicine University of Cambridge