64 NATIONAL TRENDS IN BIOLOGY 



the fact that mechanistic science can never bring out a 

 sense of human values.^'' One can, of course, always say 

 that science shows that the race must be protected, and 

 that consequently one can work out some scheme of mor- 

 ality and a sense of duty from that angle — that what 

 is best for the race and what is best for posterity should 

 be done. But, doesn't such a scheme only furnish a motive 

 without any obligation? Suppose I care not a whit for 

 the race or for posterity, then why should I hold it a 

 duty to sacrifice even a little convenience for them? 



Mankind vaguely reaches out for something positive 

 in the way of an analysis of duty. Nikolai recognized this 

 in his Biology of War. The entire volume was written, 

 practically just to make the point, that something must 

 furnish an obligation if there is to be any duty. And yet, 

 astonishing as it may seem, after going over every review 

 of this book, in every journal written in English (and 

 there were many reviews) , I cannot find a single reviewer 

 even so much as mentioning this very thing, about and 

 for which the book was written. 



We seem to find that scientists are of two types : The 

 one insistent upon remaining quite modest and laying 

 emphasis upon how little we know about anything; the 

 other not so modest, who insists upon laying all the em- 

 phasis on the great progress that has been made. 



Even when we dissect Poincare's division of types of 

 mind into the Gallic and the Anglo-Saxon,^^ we find the 

 philosopher Schwegler insisting that the Anglo-Saxon 

 mind is extremely acute, but seldom profound. 



