4 NATURE-STUDY REVIEW [12:1— Jan., 1916 



There are no parties in science. There may be difference of 

 opinion when we do not yet know the truth, and variations in 

 interpretation, and personal antagonisms between those whose 

 science does not reach to the heart ; but government at present is 

 organized partisanship. A merchant is not partisan in his shop, nor 

 a manufacturer in his factory, nor a farmer on his farm, nor a teacher 

 in his class-room; but at the polls these persons think they are 

 not citizens unless they have opinions which are correct because 

 they hold them. This long-continued practice solidifies opinion 

 and makes it impregnable to evidence; we come at length to 

 substitute habit for reason. 



It is not to be desired that there shall be an end to argument 

 and discussion, but we ought to know that we cannot solve our 

 questions by unscientific polemics, however much we may settle 

 them for the time being. 



I was reading a book on the war, and expressed my interest 

 in it. My friend asked which side the author took. I replied 

 that he took neither side. With astonishment he asked me how, 

 then, the man could write a book on the war. To come to a 

 public question merely with the desire to know and not to have 

 an opinion in advance, is sufficiently unusual to excite comment. 

 Verily, we are yet a long way from the open mind, the one that 

 does not immediately take sides. The scientist makes inquiries 

 long before he has an opinion. We may be open-minded with 

 equanimity and with much self-admiration on abstract questions 

 that are far off, but when they become concrete we are partisan. 

 It is difficult to see facts in the face of self-interest, but this is 

 nevertheless the conquest of the science-spirit. 



When do we ever acquire the open mind on the tariff during 

 a political campaign? It is a vast pity that the tariff is ever 

 mentioned in political platforms. It is not a partisan question. 

 It is an economic problem. It should be worked out impartially 

 by persons who are competent to work it out and quite aside from 

 the question of the person who shall be President of the United 

 States. We should attack the problem in the same spirit that 

 we attack a problem of productivity in an experiment station. 

 We should first divest ourselves of inherited opinions and street- 

 corner sagaciousness and then seek to know the truth; then we 

 can make such use of the knowledge as the country seems to 

 require, and this requirement should likewise be made the subject 

 of long-continued impartial investigation. 



