A. B. Macallum 73 



is launched against Science chiefly in the polemical publications of 

 the orthodox theological school, 



It is, however, when the criticism comes from the rank and 

 file of the army of Science that it does the most mischief, and especi- 

 ally so when it is urged in defence, not of reHgious beliefs or dog- 

 mas of a philosophical school, but of dogmas hke vitaHsm, the ac- 

 ceptance of which postulates a negation of the estabhshed methods 

 of Science. 



It is not difficult, though not fair, to charge Science with pre- 

 tensions to infalHbility, then to recall its mistakes, its discarded 

 theories and generalizations and thereby to impugn its claims to 

 speak with authority on matters with which it busies itself. That 

 appeals occasionally to the man in the street and it gains a httle, 

 perhaps desired, notoriety for the critic, but does it help us in the 

 final cast of things to question the hard-won achievements of the 

 human mind and say that they are nought? By what other methods 

 than those followed in scientific research can organized knowledge 

 be gained ? Is it by intuition, revelation or the dialectics and pipe- 

 dreams of the intellectualists ? It is, therefore, beside the mark for 

 Von Uexküll to ask "Was ist eine wissenschaftliche Wahrheit?" 

 and to answer "Ein Irrtum von heute." In a different spirit and 

 with a World of difference in ultimate meaning is the Observation of 

 Huxley that " history wams us that it is the customary fate of new 

 truths to begin as heresies and to end as superstitions." 



Science, then, is not infallible and never can be. Equally lack- 

 ing is the quality of infalHbility in Scientific Truth. The essence 

 of a truth in Science lies in its power to explain phenomena in a 

 satisfactory way. If it does not do this, then it is not a truth. In 

 a certain stage of the development of scientific knowledge a theory 

 is found to explain or relate all the known facts in a particular 

 ränge of phenomena. This is the source of the satisfaction it gives 

 to the scientific mind and at that stage it is accepted as a Truth. 

 But subsequently discovered facts in the same province may refuse 

 to be so explained or related, and the previously accepted truth will, 

 consequently, be discarded for one that will give this service. 



An illustration is to be found in the history of the theories of 

 light. Newton held that light emanated from its source in the 



