500 



SCIENCE 



only too often we think of them as 

 ends in themselves— forgetting what 

 they are for. 



Now if we ourselves— if we scien- 

 tists—forget the ends in our absorp- 

 tion with the means, that is bad 

 enough; for then our work loses its 

 meaning. But it is even more danger- 

 ous if we let the public believe that 

 our machines and our mechanisms are 

 ends in themselves. For then our work, 

 which in the end depends upon public 

 support, will surely be destroyed. And 

 it will be destroyed by the public even 

 though the public itself, rather than 

 the scientists, would be the principal 

 losers. 



Let us bring this closer home. It is 

 a paradoxical fact that, in these days 

 of the mid-20th ccntun', science and 

 technology are being simultaneously 

 praised to the skies and damned with 

 religious fe^^'or; they are being hand- 

 somely supported and heartily kicked. 

 Scientists are publicly acclaimed as a 

 group and privately slugged as indi- 

 viduals. 



Why is this? 



Clearly, we have not told our story 

 adequately. Our ph^'sical achievements 

 are evident. But, because they are 

 physical, we are accused of being mate- 

 rialists. Because the tools of science 

 are powerful, their power is feared and 

 those with the power are suspected of 

 evil motives. Because weapons have 

 been produced to help men fight in 

 their own defense, it is assumed that 

 they also make men want to fight. So 

 we see that as we brag about our knowl- 

 edge but are silent about our aims, then 

 the public will come to ignore our 

 knowledge and denounce our aims. 



WHAT SCIENTISTS WORK FOR 



So my first plea is that scientists 

 shall throw off their reticence in speak- 

 ing of their feelings and come out 

 boldly and unashamedly to say, "We 



are working for the betterment and 

 happiness of human beings— nothing 

 less and nothing more." 



But, in spite of the romanticism of 

 the poet, we know full well that for 

 most human beings liappiness is not 

 attained solely by sitting under a tree 

 with a loaf of bread and a jug of wine. 

 And even if it were, someone has to 

 bake the bread and bottle the wine. 

 The poet was right in suggesting that 

 the essential elements of happiness 

 consist of food, shelter, companionship 

 and leisure. He only forgot to mention 

 that these must be achieved by effort, 

 and that the effort itself may bring 

 happiness, too. 



In any case, we are forced at once 

 to consider how human effort can be 

 most effectively emploved to provide 

 the physical elements for happiness 

 and also the leisure to enjoy them. Nor 

 are we content— as were those of medi- 

 eval and ancient times— to have many 

 people exert the effort and a few people 

 enjoy the leisure. We have proved that 

 all may work and all may play. 



Now what is it that has made it 

 possible for us today to think of a 

 modest amount of happiness coupled 

 with a reasonable amount of work as 

 a possible goal for all people, rather 

 than just a few? The answer is, clearly, 

 that a series of intellectual achieve- 

 ments have enabled men to enlarge, 

 to expand, and to dream of achieving 

 a moral goal. 



What are the intellectual achieve- 

 ments? 



I think it is fair to sav that the 

 essential cause of the difference in the 

 physical and the moral outlook of the 

 western world in the 20th centurv, as 

 compared to the 10th is simply that, 

 along some time between those dates, 

 men invented a new process of think- 



ing- 



Men had, of course, always thought, 

 always obser\'ed, always speculated, al- 

 ways \\ondered, always asked ques- 



