246 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



order could not be upheld especially in the subdivisions of a science. 

 Although Spencer appeared to have the best of this argument, there is, 

 nevertheless, some ground for holding to the general principle expressed 

 in Comte's theory. Following the three-fold division of the sciences, 

 which I have given above, it seems clear that the sciences dealing with 

 the environment developed before those dealing with life, and the latter 

 group developed in advance of those dealing with society. This is, 

 moreover, the order of their present degree of advancement as well as 

 their early development. 



The development of the sciences seems, in fact, to be influenced by 

 two conditions, first the immediate interest of men, and secondly the 

 complexity of the phenomena investigated. These two conditions 

 account sufficiently for the relative growth of different branches of 

 knowledge at different times. In early stages of civilization man's atten- 

 tion was concentrated chiefly upon the physical environment. To get a 

 food supply and other necessaries of life more easily, to protect them- 

 selves against their enemies, to provide for the needs of the dead, and 

 to satisfy the demands of the gods, were all important problems which 

 stimulated a knowledge of the environment and brought at least a 

 practical working knowledge of the simplest laws of mathematics, 

 astronomy and physics, together with some knowledge of minerals, and 

 of animal and vegetable life. The phenomena of life, the desire to live 

 indefinitely and to overcome disease, attracted attention almost as soon 

 as problems of the environment. But life is much stranger and more 

 complicated than those objects of nature which may be readily examined, 

 and a positive knowledge of the phenomena of life was much more slowly 

 acquired. The heavenly bodies and other natural objects which were so 

 far removed that their character was not easily perceived, and living 

 things which were so complex that they were not understood, remained 

 objects of superstition and speculation much longer than inanimate 

 objects close at hand. The persistence of religious superstition delayed 

 considerably knowledge of human anatomy and disease, favoring rather 

 the pursuit of astrology and alchemy. The anatomical studies of the 

 Alexandrian school were in opposition to the prevalent sentiments of 

 the time, and the Mohammedan religion hindered the study of biology, 

 as compared with other sciences among the Arabians. Biology, there- 

 fore, developed later than the physical sciences, not because it did not 

 attract attention, but because it was too complicated to be understood in 

 an early stage of mental development. The social sciences, on the other 

 hand, developed last, both because they did not attract attention 

 at an early period and because they dealt with complex phenom- 

 ena. It is true, as Spencer points out, that some practical knowl- 

 edge of social organization must have appeared at a very early 

 time and conditioned, in a sense, all forms of progress. But this kind 



