Talk:James Doull

"outside the philosophical mainstream"
I don't follow this sentence: "Indeed his Hegelian views (especially his judgement that Hegel had been successful in his attempt to articulate in the form of self-developing concepts the inner content of the Christian revelation) were no doubt a major reason that he was regarded as outside the philosophical mainstream." Does having Hegelian views put someone outside the philosophical mainstream? That isn't reasonable. Or was it really the part in brackets? in which case the sentence should be rewritten to claim that clearly. --Richardson mcphillips (talk) 01:22, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

Not a leprosy scientist, right?
In 1939 this paper was published: I think this James A. Doull is not the James A. Doull in the paper. This one would have been 21 years old - not impossible but unlikely - and also this one was not a laboratory scientist. Also the paper was published in Ohio.  Blue Rasberry  (talk)  18:57, 28 December 2015 (UTC)

No, the leprosy scientist was James Angus Doull (1889–1963), an infectious disease physician and researcher, who is named in this citation:


 * https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2586871/

death of wife
his widow Floy Andrews Doull just died. https://memorials.sladesfuneralhome.ca/floy-doull/4784964/ --2607:FEA8:FF01:4B63:285D:9A37:642F:F3D (talk) 17:59, 13 December 2021 (UTC)