744 SCIENCE PROGRESS 



One must not forget, in passing, the independence of the poet — 

 as the scientist has his own independent field of work, the investi- 

 gation of the laws of Nature, so also has the poet. In his case 

 it is the expression of the spirit of Nature. It is where these two 

 spheres of activity — the investigation of the laws of Nature and 

 the expression of the spirit of Nature — overlap that we find the 

 common ground of science and poetry; but whereas science 

 reaches it by an analysis of natural phenomena, poetry attains it 

 by that direct intuition which is the poetic characteristic par 

 excellence. Then again this common ground, where science and 

 poetry meet and join hands, is an elusive thing, which though 

 easy to recognise is by no means easy to describe without taking 

 personal factors into account ; it is so largely a matter of 

 temperament. It has been said that " visible beauty exalts our 

 emotions far more than a dissection of the wondrous and intricate 

 systems beneath it. The sight of a star or of a flower, or the 

 story of a single noble action, touches our humanity more nearly 

 than the greatest discovery or invention could ever do and does 

 the soul more good." The passage is a striking one and expresses 

 a belief that is all too general ; but though true in a sense it 

 contains a confusion in thought which it is not difficult to point 

 out. Although a noble action may appeal to us and to our 

 human sympathy more strongly than the latest scientific dis- 

 covery, say that of aerial locomotion, it is because its very nature 

 is human, it pertains of the very essence of humanity ; while the 

 latter is something extraneous, without which the world would 

 probably be as well off. The world was no less beautiful in the 

 days before artificial means of locomotion came into being, but 

 we can scarcely conceive a world so ugly, so repulsive, so utterly 

 devoid of beauty that nobility of thought, word, and deed was 

 unknown ; we cannot conceive a humanity so inhuman as to be 

 devoid of human sympathy and utterly unresponsive to nobility 

 and beauty of thought and action. The former part of the 

 argument, however, belongs to quite another plane, and I think 

 one may say safely that " the sight of a star or of a flower " does 

 not " touch our humanity more nearly," or anything like as 

 nearly, as a " dissection of the wondrous and intricate systems " 

 that lie beneath the object ; or as an analysis of the processes 

 underlying its growth and development ; for by the very act of 

 dissection or analysis new beauties and fresh wonders are 

 revealed to our ken which far surpass those laid bare by a 



