EDITOR'S TABLE. 



845 



nature, life, and man, as they are rep- 

 resented in literature. To incorporate 

 the scientific method with the method 

 of literature is impossible ; to subordi- 

 nate it to that method is to destroy it. 

 That which is obtained from books 

 alone, without an acquaintance with 

 phenomena, is not true science but 

 sham science. Scientific culture is a 

 training and a grounding in the scien- 

 tific method, a mental habit of observ- 

 ing, analyzing, and comparing the act- 

 ual facts, and the advantages of this 

 method can only be gained by a dis- 

 tinctly recognized, independent, and 

 systematic culture. 



How different and how contrasted 

 the literary and scientific methods real- 

 ly are, becomes again apparent when 

 we observe the feelings to which they 

 respectively give rise. Mr. Arnold con- 

 tinually refers in his article to two ele- 

 ments of human nature to be satisfied 

 by culture, the sense for beauty and the 

 sense for conduct; but he nowhere 

 speaks of the sense for truth, and this, 

 obviously because truth, as an object of 

 feeling, does not enter into the literary 

 ideal. It was, in fact, because literature 

 as a method had never cared for truth, 

 and had no interest in the search for it, 

 that the need for science arose to re- 

 pair the omission ; and science has only 

 advanced as the feeling for truth has 

 been developed and deepened. To the 

 man of letters, devoted to the beautiful, 

 the fine in art, and the pleasing in life, 

 the scientific passion for truth is unin- 

 telligible and very naturally repugnant. 

 The annals of literature are full of the 

 aversion of its cultivators to science and 

 all that belongs to it. The last example 

 is given by Mr. Boyesen, who talked 

 mucU with the poet Longfellow, and 

 has printed some of his chronicles in 

 the " Christian Union." He says of 

 Mr. Longfellow: "The scientific ques- 

 tions which agitate the intellectual at- 

 mosphere of the century also left him 

 cold; and if they were touched upon 

 in his presence he ^soon showed by the 



, vagueness of his answers that the topic 

 was not congenial to him. His thoughts 

 moved in a purely literary sphere, and 

 I believe I do him no injustice if I say 

 that life interested him primarily in its 

 relation to literature. He was of opin- 

 ion that Goethe made a mistake in de- 

 voting so much of his energy to scien- 

 tific pursuits, and that his later works 

 (particularly ' Elective Affinities ' and 

 his second part of ' Faust ') were much 

 injured by the influence of his scientific 

 theories." This dislike of science means 

 nothing more than intense devotion to 

 an ideal that is foreign to science. But, 

 on the other hand, the scientific ideal 

 gives rise to emotions of its own, of 

 equal if not even greater intensity. 

 The history of science has proved that 

 the love of truth is one of the strongest 

 passions of human nature. It has abun- 

 dantly proved that men will forego all 

 the lower and common enjoyments of 

 life, when that becomes necessary, to 

 promote the attainment of truth. So 

 powerful may this feeling become that 

 the customary selfish pleasures and am- 

 bitions of men seem trivial and con- 

 temptible in comparison ; and who will 

 say that this love of truth, which is the 

 inspiration of the scientific method, is 

 not the noblest impulse that can ani- 

 mate the mind of man ? 



But, when half through his address, 

 Mr. Arnold does find an issue between 

 literature and science. He says : " But 

 it is proposed to make the training in 

 natural science the main part of educa- 

 tion, for the great majority of mankind 

 at any rate. And here, I confess, I 

 part company with the friends of phys- 

 ical science, with whom, up to this 

 point, I have been agreeing. ... At 

 present it seems to me that those who 

 are for giving to natural knowledge, 

 as they call it, the chief place in the 

 education of the majority of mankind, 

 leave one important thing out of their 

 account, the constitution of human nat- 

 ure." Knowledge, he admits, is inter- 

 esting, and much of it important, but it 



