MICHIGAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCE. 31 



the really vital considerations are often hopelessly entanjrled with non- 

 essentials. A little reflection must shoAv that upon the principle of 

 chances the weight of evidence in the case of but few problems can be 

 evenly balanced; but a clever exaggeration of the non-essentials seldom 

 fails to raise serious doubts in the minds of a considerable proportion 

 of those considered qualified to reach a decision. Why, if this, be not so, 

 have so many of our highly trained scholars failed to sec tliat the events 

 which are now transpiring have long been clearly foreshadowed, and 

 were inevitable results of observed conditions in a world controlled by 

 natural laws. This is due to a lack of vision — of prescience — which 

 above ajl is dependent upon first clearing away from a question the 

 rubbish whicli lias accumulated about it, and then focusing the attention 

 unerringly ui)on the heart of the problem. 



Lack of vision largely explains the great inertia of science Avhich 

 causes the retention of useless or harmful theories long after their in- 

 adequacy or falsity has been exposed, and this inertia is greatly aggra- 

 vated by potent accessory influences. Any successful theory which 

 occujjies a basic position in science, is sure to be built upon as a founda- 

 tion for other theories, and these are likely to crumble with its collapse. 

 Much money and labor are now invested in treatises and popular Avorks. 

 the income from which becomes seriously affected whenever their 

 reliability is brought into question. The ultra-conservative attitude of 

 scientists which results from these and other causes is as obvious as it is 

 deplorable. 



As we look back over the past and, studying the advances of science, 

 mark of!" upon the way the stations at each of which a new horizon has 

 opened, it is easy to see that the successive marches, like the halts 

 between, have been far too long. The attempt to reproduce from each 

 station the entire panorama of the horizon has led to a sketchiness and an 

 inaccuracy in the depicting of all remoter i)ortions of the field, which 

 might have been avoided had the viewpoint been promptly moved for- 

 ward so soon as the nature of the nearer terrane had become firmly 

 established. My appeal is, therefore, for an individual study of those 

 theories of science with which each worker is concerned, and for an 

 early decision upon their availability whenever a judgment is warranted. 

 Accepted, if necessary, as working hypotheses to be rigidly tested by 

 observation and experiment, the new ideas are infinitely to be preferred 

 to those theories which have been found wanting under, the tests either 

 of experiment or of searching observation. 



It might perhaps be asserted that the picture which I have drawn of 

 the past and present of scientific theories is one not calculated to cause 

 entire satisfaction; and T could hardly deny the truth of the assertion; 

 but when, I would ask, has either an instilntion or an individual hcen 



