
“The fascination of Fisher for me is that my research is mainly in evolutionary biology, which involves a certain amount of genetics from time to time, and I teach and have done some research in statistics. So I look to Fisher as a founding father in all three of the disciplines that we are celebrating.”
–Alan Grafen
Ronald Aylmer Fisher was born on February 17, 1890 in East Finchley, London to George Fisher, who was a fine arts auctioneer, and Katie Heath. Fisher was the youngest of seven, and according to relatives, was a precocious child while also showing surprisingly advanced arithmetic skills at as young as the age of three. When Fisher was fourteen, his mother passed away, and in that same year, he also received a scholarship in mathematics to the school, Harrow. From a young age, Fisher’s eyesight was quite poor and because of this, he usually listened in class without ever taking any notes, and solved problems mentally, which proved to be useful later on in his life.
In 1909, Fisher received a scholarship to Cambridge, concentrating mainly on mathematics, theoretical physics, and astronomy. In 1911, the formation of Cambridge University Eugenics Society was formed under Fisher’s persistence, and he often spoke on Charles Darwin’s theory of evolution and natural selection as he looked up to Darwin. Much of Fisher’s statistical interest stemmed from this group, and he also grew to have a great interest in evolutionary theory, specifically with genetics. In April of 1912, Fisher published his first paper, which showed what would later come to be known as the method of maximum likelihood. He graduated in 1912 with distinction, but his tutor, however, believed differently of him, saying, "...if he had stuck to the ropes he would have made a first class mathematician, but he would not."
Fisher was awarded the Wollaston scholarship, which allowed him to stay at Cambridge for a year longer and he continued his studies on Theory of Errors by George Airy. This newfound interest led him to examine statistical problems. After finishing at Cambridge, Fisher briefly worked at a farm in Canada, but soon returned to London and became a statistician in the Mercantile and General Investment Company for a few years (1913-1915). Then he was a high school mathematics and science teacher for a handful of years. Teaching was his way of serving the country because he was rejected from the army due to his poor eyesight. It turned out that as a teacher, he was mediocre at best, but was definitely recognized as an exceptional thinker who usually had difficulties explaining his complex ideas to other people. His statistical work at the time drew attention from Karl Pearson who was a well-known statistician of the era. Pearson published Fisher’s article on general sampling distribution and without telling Fisher, included a critique of Fisher’s paper. This led to a heated confrontation between the two, and it turned out that Fisher was actually correct in his claims, but as Pearson was popular in the day, Fisher’s papers were withdrawn from the Royal Society due to the conflict between Pearson and Fisher.
“He was the greatest statistician in the world, a geneticist of such prescience that the genius of his conclusions is still unfolding itself today.”
-E.B. Ford
In 1917, Fisher married Ruth Eileen Guinness, and they had eight children together, but eventually separated. Fisher published many noteworthy papers, including establishing a way of doing sample measurement in statistics using mathematics. He also wrote a few papers on eugenics because of his concern coming from the upper class as he had the belief that “less talented” lower class families produced offspring at a faster rate than the “more talented” upper class families. In 1918, he wrote a paper on Gregor Mendel’s theory of inherited characteristics, which would lead to his work on the statistical analysis of variance later on. Fisher decided to stop teaching in 1919 after being offered a position by Sir John Russell as a statistician at the Rothamsted Experimental Station (as shown in the photo below), which was the oldest agricultural research institute in the UK. In his time there, Fisher made numerous contributions to the statistical approach of experiments including the design, as well as genetics.




“There seems little I can say by way of summary of so great a scientist and so great a friend except perhaps this: he was supremely an individualist, and if ever there was a man whose life was guided wholly by the truth, as he perceived it, it was Sir Ronald Fisher.”
-E.B. Ford
Literature Cited:
1. Crow, J. F., and W. F. Dove. "Perspectives: Anecdotal, Historical and Critical Commentaries on Genetics." Genetics Society of America (2005).
2. Fienberg, S. E., and D. V. Hinkley. R.A. Fisher, An Appreciation. New York: Springer Verlag, 1980.
3. "Fisher Biography." MacTutor History of Mathematics. School of Mathematics and Statistics. http://www-history.mcs.st-andrews.ac.uk/Biographies/Fisher.html.
4. Grafen, A. "Fisher the Evolutionary Biologist." Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series D (The Statistician) 52.3 (2003): 319-17.
5. "Sir Ronald Aylmer Fisher." University of Minnesota Morris. http://www5555.morris. umn.edu/ ~sungurea/introstat/history/w98/RAFisher.html.
6. Skipper, R. A. "The Persistence of the R.A. Fisher-Sewall Wright." Biology and Philosophy 17 (2002): 341-42.
This was very interesting to hear the impact Fisher had to evolution while first being a great statistician. Interesting to see that he had eight children and his research on how less talented lower class families produce at a faster rate than more talented upper class families. Was there any more eugenic findings about these theories? Because he was upper class himself, did he disagree with his theory to producing at a slower rate? Was his children spaced out or born one after another?
ReplyDeleteI think this paper goes great with the fact that we are in Evolution and it is nice to see how many researchers are out there that have branched off form Darwin and its beginnings of Evolutionary theories.
I really liked this article. It shows how the many disciplines of science need to be used together to receive the maximum gain out of ones studies. Evolution is such a controversial study that some need strong hard facts to even consider it a possibility for the formation of what we see in biodiversity of the modern world. Even with overwhelming evidence and much of the data refuting evolution being unscientific it seems that many still do not believe in evolution. The reasons for this is very hard to put ones finger on, however it is a fact that many people of seemingly high intelligence to not believe in evolution.
ReplyDeleteDo you think there is evidence or a sequence of evidence that could ever be put together that would make these strong nonbelievers in evolution come to believe in this process?
Thanks for the read.