60 THE PATH OF SCIENCE 



served through his senses, especially those facts that are ob- 

 served by the methods of coincidences using instruments. 

 And his interest in making this classification is greatly stimu- 

 lated, perhaps chiefly stimulated, by the fact that from it 

 he can deduce the possibilities of observing and correlating 

 other facts. 



It is impossible to discuss the method of the scientist with- 

 out giving the impression that it is a purposeful method, 

 that the scientist is aware of what he is doing, but this is 

 usually not the case. A scientist does not always collect facts 

 and deliberately endeavor to fit those facts into a pattern. 

 He often collects the facts and continuously fits them into 

 patterns without regard to the process itself. He may select 

 the facts in which he is interested and attempt to fit them 

 together into a theory, change his mind and try another 

 theory, abandon some facts about which he is doubtful, and 

 replace them by others without any conscious direction of 

 the operation.* In this process, the scientist draws upon his 

 imagination and relies upon his intuition. The operation, 

 in fact, is largely performed by the subconscious mind, and 

 it is in the facility with which they do this that scientists 

 differ most in their quality. 



In practical scientific discovery and in technology, three 

 factors are involved, and people vary considerably in their 

 ability as regards these individual factors. They are theo- 

 retical synthesis, observation and experiment, and invention. 

 Psychologically, each involves distinct methods of working 

 and different types of mind. There is even opposition among 

 them; that is, it is unlikely that one man wdll excel in more 



* Charles Singer (A Short History of Science, Oxford, Clarendon 

 Press, 1941) points out that scientific articles, and especially scientific 

 textbooks, give a false impression of the process by which investigators 

 reach their conclusions. In articles and books, no information is given 

 on the false starts and discarded hypotheses. The account reads as 

 though the work ran smoothly to its inevitable conclusion in accordance 

 with the principles of scientific investigation. As Singer says, "For this 

 reason, among others, science can never be learned from books, but only 

 by contact with phenomena." 



