I see utility in reading scientific literature produced with a vastly different outlook. What old scientists emphasized back then is worth investigating today t

I see utility in reading scientific literature produced with a vastly different outlook. What old scientists emphasized back then is worth investigating today to understand how and why they arrived at their conclusions (you know, that whole "study history to avoid repeating mistakes" spiel). Could they simply not observe the world with fine-enough detail? Where did their views derive from? Asimov's broad strokes in here are correct, even if specific details aren't. His presentation of biological principles is lucid to a degree few can match.