PURE SCIENCE AND THE IDEA OF THE HOLY 



publication of any criticism, no matter on what scientific authority. 

 I say this on the basis of first-hand editorial experience. Furthermore, 

 it is not generally realised what systematic mystification goes on 

 within important departments of national life such as the chemical 

 industry. A friend of mine who became an industrial chemist used to 

 tell me of the code employed by the storekeepers in his firm, in which 

 every chemical substance which the workmen had to draw from the 

 store was given a wrong, and if possible, a confusing, name, so as to 

 avoid at all costs the danger of any trade secret leaking out to a com- 

 peting firm through the workers employed. On one occasion some 

 plumbers who were doing a job in the works and drew what they 

 were told was "rosin" from the store, drew something very different, 

 with remarkable effects. All these phenomena are not those of a 

 healthy society. 



It is clear, therefore, that one important sense of the phrase "keeping 

 science pure" is that scientific men should be constantly on their 

 guard against the distortion of truth for reactionary, political or 

 economic purposes. I write "reactionary" deliberately. Progressive 

 political movements have no need to distort it. 



The Position of the Scientist in Society. 



We return at last, then, to the position of the scientist in society. 

 He is not only a scientist, but a citizen as well. There has been much 

 talk (and not uncommonly, in the editorials of Nature), about the 

 importance of giving the scientist more say in government. The 

 value of this is not to be denied. But when it is carried further, as in 

 the views of the "technocrats," and when it is suggested that scientists 

 should themselves be the rulers of society, the suggestion reveals its 

 superficiality.^ What has to be decided is the ultimate end for which 

 society exists. Is it the greatest happiness of the greatest number.'^ 

 The right of every man and woman to life, liberty, and the pursuit 

 of happiness } The right of the individual to work, food, love, and 

 opportunity to develop his talents in the common service.^ Or the 

 military domination of one state or "race" over other peoples, the 



^ This was the theme of another controversy in Nature. R. H. F. Finlay (1941, 147, 

 119) expressed the hope that "scientific instead of party government would prove the 

 unifier of man, and usher in an era of universal peace." The distinguished entomologist, 

 V. B. Wigglesworth (1941, 147, 206) hastened to point out that divided counsels are 

 the very breath of science, which is always growing. It would be a tyranny indeed to 

 give to the current beliefs of science the force of law. 



117 



