TYPES OF MEN 273 



TYPES OF MEN 



By Professor S. N. PATTEN 



UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA 



THE study of human types has fallen into disrepute because of the 

 advance of exact science. Accurate measurements have displaced 

 crude observations. In this way, the science of eugenics has been evolved 

 with many earnest advocates who think the victories of physical science 

 may be duplicated in social fields. Between this group and the workers 

 in the various fields of social betterment there is a chasm and much 

 friction. This is partly a matter of temperament, but it is largely due 

 to the different methods of research which the two groups employ. The 

 relation between the social worker and those he would help is personal, 

 and his judgment of them is based on observation. His creed demands 

 a saving of life; hence we find him engaged in the struggle to prolong 

 life and to prevent the elimination the eugenist favors. Social elimina- 

 tion, he would say, is so crude a process that it sweeps off a thousand 

 deserving persons (especially children) to the one really deserving 

 victim of its processes. 



The eugenist has an advantage in his acceptance of the doctrine of 

 the non-inheritance of acquired characters. A direct connection is 

 assumed between the visible trait to be favored or eliminated and the 

 characters of the germ cell that are passed on from generation to genera- 

 tion. If the character make the visible trait, rigid selection based on 

 the elimination of traits is the only way of ridding the race of unde- 

 sirable traits. Improving the condition of individuals would help them, 

 but if traits do not influence characters, such betterments would have 

 no effect on coming generations. The social worker, however, thinks 

 that his efforts to help individuals are of social importance, and hence 

 sympathizes with, and suffers from the downfall of Lamarckianism. 

 The statistical averages of the eugenist also seem to complement the 

 work of biologists by giving an objective measure of innate characters. 

 Biologists can not trace the determinants of the germ cell through the 

 subsequent development of an organism. They are, however, of the 

 opinion that the visible traits shown at maturity are the result of the 

 action of the determinants of the germ cell. To assume that the aver- 

 age development shown at maturity is the index of the germ cell deter- 

 minants is a natural way of completing this proof. 



These facts give to the eugenists the strength they have and make 

 their arguments seem plausible. In a recent article,^ I have tried to 

 point out the fallacy of their position and to put in more favorable light 



*The Popular Science Monthly, October, 1911. 



vol,. LXXX. — 19. 



