282 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 1925 



tions thus needed and inspired. It is for these reasons principally 

 that geology has earned its reputation as a fighting science. It 

 is hard to decide just exactly when evidence amounts to absolute 

 proof; and different observers, having reached varying stages in 

 the completeness of their observations, may be led by the sum of 

 them to different explanatory theories; or in the sphere of their own 

 work they may be specially influenced b}'^ facts current there. 



This seems to be the place to enter a protest against dominant 

 ideas with regard to education and training in geology. The 

 tendenc}' in early education has been to squeeze out other sciences 

 in favor of those that are called fundamental, and to suppose that, 

 because it makes use of most other sciences, training in geology 

 ought not to be begun until all others have been mastered. This 

 is to go counter to the history of the science itself. Its leading 

 methods were evolved in the early days of physics and chemistry 

 and by men often ignorant even of such principles as were then 

 understood. As geology has grown it lias given to these sciences 

 many i^roblems for solution in return for the solutions received, 

 problems which would have long waited for attention had not their 

 geological application been urgent. Further, as the solution of his 

 problems requires not only a very extensive knowledge, but a work- 

 manlike ability to apply both methods and principles, it is difficult 

 to say at what stage even the most competent scientific man, if he is 

 ultimately to deal wuth all his problems himself, can be ready to 

 begin the .study of geology. 



Meantime, qualities of far higher value to a geologist, which in 

 most cases can only be acquired young, are being lost, such as 

 the habit of close observation, the aptitude to distinguish minute 

 resemblances and differences, and the faculty of judging tendencies, 

 together with the instinct and patience to make collections. These 

 propensities come very early and speedily become blunted if not 

 exercised. I would advocate, with all the earnestness of an old 

 teacher, that some form of earth-knowledge involving observation 

 of facts and collection of specimens, and the drawing of inferences 

 from them, should find a place in schools and be encouraged at 

 the universities side by side with the fundamental sciences. Such 

 studies will not possess the meticulous exactitude of the others, 

 but in this respect their tendency may be corrected by them. They 

 will, however, bring the student into contact w'ith realities, things 

 as they are, instead of inaccessible, abstract conceptions, things 

 beyond experience — such as pure substances, or forces acting in 

 the ab.sence of friction. They will give him the thrill of discovery 

 and explanation, teach him that the end of science is to extract 

 law and principle from observation and experiment, and, instead 



