TWENTIETH CENTURY SCIENCE PROBLEMS. 247 



and activity, on the one hand, and all expressions of them through 

 muscular action as exhibited by motions and emotions. 



There are many reasons for expecting most important disclosures 

 from this direction, which may make needful many changes in common 

 beliefs in educational theories and efforts, of responsibility in crime 

 and the proper management of defectives of all sorts. It is not un- 

 likely as great changes as took place during the last century in the 

 beliefs on many important subjects will be required for the work of 

 the twentieth century. 



So far I have been speaking of science as related knowledge. 

 Knowledge of such a kind as to react upon our opinions of men, of in- 

 stitutions, society, and the universe as a whole, but science is more 

 popularly conceived as improved ways of doing things, of new products 

 and new possibilities in life, of the arts as managed for economy of 

 effort, enhancing comfort and removing the stress of living. These, 

 however, are not science, but the products of science, and every one is 

 properly concerned to know what changes are likely to come from 

 such a source. The mechanic arts of the last century worked a won- 

 derful change in the modes of living, in the variety and kinds of wants. 

 If we could be deprived suddenly of all save such things as could be 

 had a hundred years ago, we should all be made as miserable as one 

 can think, yet those who lived a hundred years ago were no more mis- 

 erable than we are. They got as much out of their lives as we do out 

 of ours, and never suffered from thinking they did not have railways, 

 telegraphs, telephones, steamships, automobiles and weather forecasts. 

 These things could never be missed as no one had ever had them, 

 and perhaps most people would have thought a prophet of them to be 

 a romancer. 



Many lessons have been drawn from history with the expectation 

 that we may the better order our lives. How many historians there 

 have been, and how few are those whose interpretations have not been 

 wrong! One may recall that squib by Bishop Stnbbs, of Oxford, 

 whose, contempt for Froude was profound. Canon Kingsley had re- 

 signed the chair of history at the university, assigning as reason that 

 what had been understood to be history was unfounded. 



While Froude instructs the Scottish youth 

 That parsons never tell the truth, 

 The Reverend Canon Kingsley cries 

 That history is a pack of lies. 



These strange results who shall combine? 



One plain reflection solves the mystery, 

 That Froude thinks Kingsley a divine 



While Kingsley goes to Froude for history. 



One might once fairly have inferred that leisure was what all man- 



