502 EXPERIMENT STATION RECORD. 



creates for the use of mankind, but the joower must be created before 

 it can be used." This distinction is not always made, either by the 

 public or by men engaged in investigation which aims at practical 

 results. It is a common mistake to overlook the fact that the prin- 

 ciples underlying an agricultural problem must first be studied be- 

 fore the problem itself can be solved. The fuller realization of this 

 is a good introduction to the method of science. 



Defining his subject, Dr. Minot explains that "the method of sci- 

 ence " means more than " logic," involving far more than the logical 

 considerations of a subject. He expresses the belief that the logical 

 work of men of science is usually well done. " The difficulties and the 

 majority of failures are due, it seems to me, to two chief causes — 

 the first, inadequate determination of premises, and second, exagger- 

 ated confidence in the conclusions. If I am right, the method of 

 science is the result of the eft'ort to get rid of these two causes of 

 error." And again: "There is nothing to distinguish the scientific 

 method from the methods of everyday life except its presentation. 

 It is not a difference in kind or quality, but a quantitative difference, 

 which marks the work of the true scientist and gives it validity. 

 Such being the case, a broad examination of the method of science 

 reduces itself to the study of the general principles of securing 

 accuracy." 



The quality of scientific knowledge is illustrated by the distinction 

 between everyday impressions and opinions, which are. vague and 

 lacking in evidence, and a scientific observation. The preservation 

 of the evidence is the fundamental characteristic of scientific work, 

 by which it differs radically from the practice of ordinary life. This 

 leads to defining the method of science as " the art of making durable 

 trustworthy records of natural phenomena," a definition which is 

 more broad and comprehensive than at first appears, as the author 

 shows during the course of his address. 



"All science is constructed out of the jDcrsonal knowledge of indi- 

 vidual men. Science is merely the collated record of what single 

 individuals have discovered. Accordingly, we must consider, first, 

 the way in which the individual knowledges are recorded and col- 

 lated. The process begins, of course, with the publications of the 

 special scientific memoir in which the investigator records his origi- 

 nal observations and makes known his conclusions." Our present 

 standards for original memoirs have developed gradually. Harvey 

 in his essay on the circulation of the blood, published in 1628, gives 

 no precise data as to his observations or how often he repeated them. 

 Authoritative and compelling as his writing appears, he offers little 

 aid toward the repetition or verification of his results. This is true 

 of other writers of that time and later. 



