Silverstein A M
Cell Immunol. 1983 Sep;80(2):416-25. doi: 10.1016/0008-8749(83)90128-4.
We have attempted, in this series of essays on the development of the concept of immunologic specificity, to trace the history of one of the most central ideas in immunology (and indeed in biology in general). The result must be viewed as preliminary and incomplete and as an invitation to others to add, to amend, and even to disprove. Nevertheless, several interesting conclusions may be drawn, which reveal much about the workings of immunology in particular, and perhaps science in general. First, the roots of any important scientific concept (such as that of immunologic specificity) do not grow in isolation; they draw nourishment from many other disciplines. Similarly, the growth of an important concept within a given discipline will have far-reaching implications and fruits for other fields of science. Second, we may note a marked change in the manner in which immunology is currently practiced, compared with that of the end of the last century. The quantum leaps forward in funding, in numbers of scientists, and in masses of crucial data have not been without a certain cost--the substantial reduction in elegant personal style that characterized so many of our scientific forebears, and that makes so pleasant the reading of their reports. Finally, we see again and again how much his philosophical bases and disciplinary upbringing determine a scientist's approach, the questions that he asks, and the type of answers he will accept. Throughout much of immunology's history, as Jerne put it so well (44), cis- and trans-immunologists hardly spoke to one another. Or rather, a cis-immunologist sometimes spoke to a trans-immunologist, but the latter rarely answered! Fortunately, one of the attributes of scientific progress is a merging of these disparate languages, and eventual mutual comprehension.
在这一系列关于免疫特异性概念发展的文章中，我们试图追溯免疫学（乃至整个生物学）中最核心的概念之一的历史。其结果必须被视为初步的、不完整的，只是一个邀请，邀请其他人补充、修正甚至反驳。然而，我们可以得出几个有趣的结论，这些结论特别揭示了免疫学的运作方式，或许也揭示了一般科学的运作方式。首先，任何重要科学概念（如免疫特异性概念）的根源并非孤立生长；它们从许多其他学科汲取养分。同样，一个重要概念在特定学科内的发展也将对其他科学领域产生深远影响并带来成果。其次，与上世纪末相比，我们可以注意到当前免疫学实践方式发生了显著变化。资金、科学家数量以及大量关键数据的巨大飞跃并非没有一定代价——许多科学前辈所特有的优雅个人风格大幅减少，而阅读他们的报告曾是如此令人愉悦。最后，我们一次又一次地看到，一位科学家的哲学基础和学科素养在多大程度上决定了他的研究方法、他所提出的问题以及他会接受的答案类型。在免疫学的大部分历史中，正如耶尔恩（Jerne）所言（44），顺式免疫学家和反式免疫学家几乎互不交流。或者更确切地说，顺式免疫学家有时会与反式免疫学家交流，但后者很少回应！幸运的是，科学进步的特征之一是这些不同的语言相互融合，并最终实现相互理解。
