472 HUMAN BIOLOGY 



of a sow's ear, so education can never seriously modify and 

 transform original capacities. Their plea is always for 

 recognition of individual differences of native ability and for 

 selection (for anything beyond training for elementary 

 utihties) of those inherently of superior gifts. 



The issue thus raised is too complex and controverted to 

 go into here. But it is something to recognize that we must 

 have both factors in some measure. In addition, the testi- 

 mony of biology to native differences is a valuable contri- 

 bution to the educative process and is destined to become 

 more so. But most persons who approach the matter from 

 the side of education would utter a warning against too 

 ready identificacion of native differences of traits with differ- 

 ence of ability. Sympathizing personally with this view, I 

 suggest three considerations in support of it. In the first 

 place, standards or norms of abihty are much affected by 

 convention. A strictly intellectual and professional class 

 would take to measure abihties quite different capacities 

 from those which would be taken by not only executive and 

 mechanically minded persons, but also by those of strong 

 esthetic tastes. Every social culture tends to exaggerate the 

 value of certain qualities and minimize that of others. 

 When we take school education into account, even more 

 conventional factors come into play. The abilities that 

 happen to be especially cultivated in the schoolroom are 

 treated as if they were a universal measure. In short, while 

 persons may be, in theory at least, compared with one 

 another with respect to certain traits, determination of 

 how these traits themselves stand with reference to a scale of 

 superiority and inferiority of personality is a radically 

 different matter. The latter involves judgments of values 

 in respect to what sort of a person is to be socially desired and 

 prized. And such judgments are exposed to all kinds of 

 artificial influences. 



In the second place, and as the counterpart of the first 

 point, individuals are marked by all kinds of characteristics 

 which do not form a straight one-way series. A person 

 may be highly musical and not highly developed in some 

 other respects; he may have conspicuous philosophical 

 ability and be deficient in practical capacity. Children who 



