48 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



as well as our- means, in amplitude. Perfection in amplitude of means 

 few if any of us have ; but we all want it, and, failing perfection, the 

 nearest possible approacb to it. 



But we like ease, too, as well as abundance. We rate tbeso two 

 features of our sustenance at different relative values ; some of us 

 placing a bigber value on ease and otbers on amplitude. Some, for the 

 sake of ease, are willing to get along without things which others are 

 willing to work hard for. This fact must never be forgotten, for it 

 stands in the way of many very promising schemes. In personal con- 

 tact, we may have no respect for the lazy man's laziness ; but, as a sci- 

 entific fact, we are bound to respect it or lose our reckoning. 



Laziness is, in fact, a universal characteristic, and, when not excess- 

 ive, a decidedly valuable one. Whoever lacked it entirely would soon 

 work himself to death. Work wears us out. Laziness makes us de- 

 cline to wear ourselves out with work unless we see hope of a reward 

 which will rebuild us. It leads us to calculate closely the ratio of 

 effort to satisfaction. The establishment of that ratio, at the point of 

 minimum effort and maximum satisfaction, is the end and aim of all 

 human forethought. This sometimes seems not to be true. Some 

 persons seem to have a real appetite for work. But does such an 

 appetite ever survive the hope of a return, either to that person or to 

 another in whom he takes an interest ? No work is done excepting 

 to amplify the sustenance, to enlarge and complete the life of some 

 human being, or to secure for that being rest hereafter. We may 

 work on and postpone both ease and amplitude of living indefinitely, 

 but we always keep them both in mind as our future reward. We 

 may think to bestow the ease upon ourselves when we shall be too old 

 to work, and in the mean time to work and earn it. This scheme is 

 as wise as it is natural. 



We may also forego in the present some pleasures or comforts 

 which we might enjoy, for the sake of making our old age average 

 well with the rest of our lives in these respects. It is a pity that hu- 

 man beings do not all behave in this way. 



It may be hastily said that the laziness or extravagance of our fel- 

 low-beings hinders us in making a living. But just here a careful dis- 

 tinction must be made. It is one thing for them to hinder us, and 

 essentially another thing for them to fail to help us as much as they 

 might. It is this that the sluggard and the spendthrift both do. Sup- 

 posing that each barely earns whatever living he has, the spendthrift 

 helps us most, because no one can earn an ample sustenance, whatever 

 he afterward does with it, without helping his fellow-beings. This 

 rule is not necessarily universal, but it applies to all civilized countries 

 and all times. If there are any communities where human beings 

 make a living without the help of others, and without helping others, 

 these communities are not subjects of economic study, except as serv- 

 ing to illustrate the economic by reference to the uneconomic. 



