THE HISTORY OF SCIENCE 313 



THE HISTOEY OF SCIENCE— AN INTERPRETATION 



By Professor C. R. MANN 



UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO 



IN the recent discussion of the ways and means of making more 

 efficient use of science in educational work, one suggestion keeps 

 coming repeatedly to the front — perhaps more frequently than any 

 other. It is this : That the history of science be made more prominent 

 in the course. 



This suggestion has been made from a number of different points of 

 view. For example, some claim that the stories of the lives of the 

 heroes of science furnish powerful stimuli toward arousing interest in 

 and enthusiasm for the study of science. Others urge that the history 

 of inventions may be used to great advantage in linking work in 

 science with social and economic life, thus adding a touch of human 

 life to an otherwise rather abstract and impersonal subject. Still 

 others hold that scientific concepts can not be clearly formed without 

 tracing them from their origin through their development to their 

 present condition. 



The importance of recognizing that science is not ready-made, fixed 

 and finished in form and matter; the delight that young people feel 

 when they are shown that the field is open before tbem, so that they 

 too have a chance to help in the building up of science ; the pleasure of 

 knowing that he who works in science is dealing with a growing thing — 

 all of which may be obtained from a study of the history of science — 

 are all put forth as reasons for our paying attention to this side of onr 

 work. To one who thinks over these various suggestions, it must 

 appear that they are not independent of one another. Hence, because 

 of the growing importance of this matter of history of science, it 

 becomes of interest to see if a more general justification for its intro- 

 duction can not be found — one that includes all the others as special 

 cases, and at the same time points out the way in which this history 

 should be handled to enable it to produce the most valuable results. If 

 we would attempt to do this, we must first agree on what we mean by 

 history, and what by science; since each of these words covers such a 

 multitude of sins that its meaning is not sufficiently definite for our 

 purpose. 



I. The history whose study lends power to the teaching of sci- 

 ence is, naturally, not the thing that is popularly known as history; 

 namely, political history. It is evidently of small interest to science 



