222 ON THE RELATION OF THE 



because of their great practical utility, altbougli they may not seem to 

 Lave any immediate effect in developing the mind. 



Since the sciences have been separated iuto so many divisions and 

 subdivisions, since very appreciable contrasts have been developed 

 among- them, and since no one man can comprehend the whole, or even 

 a considerable part of the whole, is there any nse in keeping them to- 

 gether in the same institution ? Is the union of the four faculties in one 

 university only a remnant of the usages of the middle ages ? It has been 

 alleged that many external advantages are gained by sending students 

 of medicine to the hospitals of large cities, students of natural sciences 

 to polytechnic schools, and by erecting special seminaries and schools 

 for theologians and lawyers. Let us hope that our German universities 

 may long be preserved from the influence of such an idea ! That woulp 

 indeed tear asunder the connection between the different sciences, a 

 connection eminently important to scientific labor, and to the improve- 

 ment of the material products of that labor, as will be seen on a brief 

 consideration of the question. 



First, as regards their formal relations, I would say that the union of 

 the different sciences is necessary to maintain a healthy equilibrium of 

 the mental i^owers. Every science exercises certain faculties of the 

 mind, and strengthens them by continual practice. But all one-sided 

 development has its dangers ; it is detrimental to those faculties which 

 are less exercised, it limits our view of the whole, and leads us to over- 

 estimate our own labors. Ue who perceives that he can perform a cer- 

 tain kind of mental labor much better than other men, is too apt to 

 forget how many other things there are in which they surpass him. 

 Over-estimation of self — let no votary of science forget it — is the great- 

 est and worst enemy of all scientific labors. How many with great 

 talents have not, forgotten that criticism of self, so difficult and yet so 

 necessary to the vScholar, or have become discouraged and lax in their 

 labors, because they considered dry, persevering work unwortJiy of 

 tlicm, and were bent only on producing brilliant combinations and rev- 

 olutionizing discoveries! Uow many such men have not concluded a 

 melancholy life in an embittered and misanthropical state of mind, be- 

 cause they failed to obtain that appreciation from their fellow-men 

 which is gained only by work and success, and not by the self compla- 

 cencj^ of genius alone. The more isolated we are, the more we are 

 exposed to this danger; while, on the other hand, nothing is more con- 

 ducive to efficient mental labor than to be obliged to exert all our powers 

 to gain the appreciation of men whom we ourselves are constrained to 

 api)reciate. 



VA^^hen we compare the kinds of mental activity required in different 

 branches of science, we shall find certain differences due to the sciences 

 themselves, although we cannot deny that every man of great talent 

 has a special individual tendency which fits him for his special branch. 

 It is only necessary to compare the works of two investigators in inti- 



