VI SCIENCE AND CULTURE 14;^ 



argument tells so well as calling its author a 

 " mere scientific specialist." And, as I am afraid 

 it is not permissible to speak of this form of 

 opposition to scientific education in the past 

 tense; may we not expect to be told that this, 

 not only omission, but prohibition, of " mere 

 literary instruction and education " is a patent 

 example of scientific narrow-mindedness? 



I am not acquainted with Sir Josiah Mason's 

 reasons for the action which he has taken; but if, 

 as I apprehend is the case, he refers to the 

 ordinary classical course of our schools and 

 universities by the name of " mere literary in- 

 struction and education,'' I venture to offer 

 sundry reasons of my own in support of that 

 action. 



For I hold very strongly by two convictions — 

 The first is, that neither the discipline nor the 

 subject-matter of classical education is of such 

 direct value to the student of physical science as 

 to justify the expenditure of valuable time upon 

 either; and the second is, that for the purpose of 

 attaining real culture, an exclusively scientific 

 education is at least as effectual as an exclusively 

 literary education. 



I need hardly point out to you that these 

 opinions, especially the latter, are diametrically 

 opposed to those of the great majority of educated 

 Englishmen, influenced as they are by school and 

 university traditions. In their belief, culture is 



