664 SOCIAL SCIENCE 



other question. The authority of revealed religion is challenged by 

 many. The authority of the builders of metaphysical systems is 

 still more exposed to skeptical doubt. Is there not some way of 

 putting terra firma under our feet, of securing a foundation for 

 individual and collective conduct on which all men can agree? A 

 foundation in fact, w T e are told, rather than in theory is needed, 

 especially in view of the conflict of ethical standards, of the almost 

 hopeless divergence of the points of view from which men regard 

 those problems, which yet must be solved by concerted action. 

 Should we not attempt to bring about harmony in men's thinking 

 about social questions as the indispensable condition of securing 

 harmonious conduct? And is there, apart from religion and meta- 

 physics, which tend to divide rather than to unite men, a hope of 

 securing such harmony in the sphere of thought? At this juncture, 

 finding ourselves at such a pass, or rather at such an apparent 

 impasse, there rises before the mind the great and commanding 

 figure of Science. Science has actually achieved the difficult task 

 of bringing about agreement in the field of physical research, and, 

 basing on this agreement, it has brought about in a short time an 

 almost incredible increase in man's physical welfare. Cannot Sci- 

 ence be trusted to achieve similar results in the social field, to supply 

 the authority which we lack by determining the ends of pursuit to 

 which all conduct should converge, and, at the same time, to enrich 

 the code by closer study of the means which, human nature and 

 human conditions being what they are, will conduce to these ends? 



It is for these reasons that many persons are turning to social 

 science for help, both because it is a science and its methods are the 

 same as those which have been accredited in other fields, and because 

 the wealth of the data at its command promises to furnish sufficient 

 material for enlarging and enriching our ethical knowledge. We 

 may add that, as in the case of every new science in its initial stages, 

 the expectations as to what it can accomplish are naturally exag- 

 gerated; and thus we can understand how the hope has arisen that 

 the science of society will become a sort of social savior and will 

 relieve us from our ethical distress. 



But can social science fulfill these expectations? Misdirection of 

 effort because of false anticipation of result are sure to be paid for in 

 the end by waste and disappointment. Are we to push headlong 

 into the new path thus opened to us, without previous consideration 

 of the goal to which it can lead? What is it in the nature of social 

 science to accomplish, and what in the nature of the case is beyond 

 its reach? These surely are questions which at a time like the present 

 it is the part of sanity to put to ourselves. My answer in this paper 

 will be that it can enrich the code but cannot supply the authority 

 for the code; that it is incompetent to determine the ends of socia 



