Editing Scientist (section)

===19th century===
Until the late 19th or early 20th century, scientists were still referred to as "[[Natural philosophy|natural philosophers]]" or "men of science".<ref>Nineteenth-Century Attitudes: Men of Science. {{cite web |url=http://www.rpi.edu/~rosss2/book.html |title=Nineteenth-Century Attitudes: Men of Science |access-date=2008-01-15 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080309165847/http://www.rpi.edu/~rosss2/book.html |archive-date=2008-03-09 }}</ref><ref>Friedrich Ueberweg, History of Philosophy: From Thales to the Present Time. C. Scribner's sons v.1, 1887</ref><ref>Steve Fuller, Kuhn VS. Popper: The Struggle For The Soul Of Science. Columbia University Press 2004. Page 43. {{ISBN|0-231-13428-2}}</ref><ref>''Science'' by American Association for the Advancement of Science, 1917. v.45 1917 Jan-Jun. [https://books.google.com/books?id=4gcuAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA274 Page 274] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170302180539/https://books.google.com/books?id=4gcuAAAAMAAJ&pg=PA274&as_brr=1&ei=_TiNR7znI5mmiQGXo4TEBQ |date=2017-03-02 }}.</ref>

English philosopher and historian of science [[William Whewell]] coined the term ''scientist'' in 1833, and it first appeared in print in Whewell's anonymous 1834 review of [[Mary Somerville]]'s ''[[On the Connexion of the Physical Sciences]]'' published in the ''[[Quarterly Review]]''.<ref name=Ross1962>{{Cite journal| author = Ross, Sydney | year = 1962 | title = Scientist: The story of a word | journal = [[Annals of Science]] | volume = 18 | issue = 2 | pages = 65–85 | doi = 10.1080/00033796200202722| doi-access = free }} To be exact, the person coined the term ''scientist'' was referred to in Whewell 1834 only as "some ingenious gentleman." Ross added a comment that this "some ingenious gentleman" was Whewell himself, without giving the reason for the identification. Ross 1962, p.72.</ref> Whewell wrote of "an increasing proclivity of separation and dismemberment" in the sciences; while highly specific terms proliferated—chemist, mathematician, naturalist—the broad term "philosopher" was no longer satisfactory to group together those who pursued science, without the caveats of "natural" or "experimental" philosopher. Whewell compared these increasing divisions with Somerville's aim of "[rendering] a most important service to science" "by showing how detached branches have, in the history of science, united by the discovery of general principles."<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Whewell |first1=William |editor1-last=Murray |editor1-first=John |title=On the Connexion of the Physical Sciences By Mrs. Sommerville |journal=The Quarterly Review |issue=March & June 1834 |volume=LI |pages=54–68}}</ref> Whewell reported in his review that members of the [[British Association for the Advancement of Science]] had been complaining at recent meetings about the lack of a good term for "students of the knowledge of the material world collectively." Alluding to himself, he noted that "some ingenious gentleman proposed that, by analogy with ''artist'', they might form [the word] ''scientist'', and added that there could be no scruple in making free with this term since we already have such words as ''[[economist]]'', and ''[[atheist]]''—but this was not generally palatable".<ref name=Holmes>{{cite book |last1= Holmes|first1= R|title= The age of wonder: How the romantic generation discovered the beauty and terror of science|year= 2008|publisher= Harper Press|location= London|isbn= 978-0-00-714953-7|page= 449}}</ref>

Whewell proposed the word again more seriously (and not anonymously) in his 1840<ref name=Whewell>{{cite book |last1=Whewell|first=William|title=The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences Volume 1|location=Cambridge|page=cxiii}} or {{cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/philosophyinduc01whewgoog |title=The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences: Founded Upon Their History, Vol. 2 |last1=Whewell |first1=William |year=1847|page=[https://archive.org/details/philosophyinduc01whewgoog/page/n580 560]|publisher=New York, Johnson Reprint Corp. }}.  In the 1847 second edition, moved to volume 2 page 560.</ref> ''The Philosophy of the Inductive Sciences'':
{{blockquote|The terminations ''ize'' (rather than ''ise''), ''ism'', and ''ist'', are applied to words of all origins: thus we have to ''pulverize'', to ''colonize'', ''Witticism'', ''Heathenism'', ''Journalist'', ''Tobacconist''. Hence we may make such words when they are wanted. As we cannot use ''physician'' for a cultivator of physics, I have called him a ''Physicist''. We need very much a name to describe a cultivator of science in general. I should incline to call him a ''Scientist''. Thus we might say, that as an Artist is a Musician, Painter, or Poet, a Scientist is a Mathematician, Physicist, or Naturalist.}}
He also proposed the term ''physicist'' at the same time, as a counterpart to the French word ''physicien''. Neither term gained wide acceptance until decades later; ''scientist'' became a common term in the late 19th century in the United States and around the turn of the 20th century in [[Great Britain]].<ref name=Ross1962/><ref>{{cite web|url= http://www.victorianweb.org/science/whewell.html|title= William Whewell (1794-1866) gentleman of science|access-date= 2007-05-19|url-status= live|archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20070625171128/http://www.victorianweb.org/science/whewell.html|archive-date= 2007-06-25}}</ref><ref>Tamara Preaud, Derek E. Ostergard, The Sèvres Porcelain Manufactory. Yale University Press 1997. 416 pages. {{ISBN|0-300-07338-0}} Page 36.</ref> By the twentieth century, the modern notion of science as a special brand of information about the world, practiced by a distinct group and pursued through a unique method, was essentially in place.