22 KANSAS ACADEMY OF SCIENCE. 
rules of philosophy they may be able to ‘‘distinguish and divide a hair betwixt 
south and southwest side,’’ but are unable to tell the difference between granite 
and limestone, a pollywog and a porpoise. In the laws of political economy they 
may talk learnedly and dogmatically, but are unable to to locate the liver in 
their own body or to tell its functions. I verily believe that a third of the gradu- 
ates in arts of our universities, and a fourth of their instructors, could not tell 
whether the pancreas is located above or below the diaphragm, or whether or not 
they have either pancreas or diaphragm at all. Grant Allen, in the Cosmopoli- 
tun, says: ‘*Quite well-informed people will speak of a porpoise or a lobster as a 
fish. Such grotesque blunders ought to be made impossible; they ought to be 
considered far more damnatory evidence of ignorance and ill breeding than ‘you 
was’ or ‘me and him went there.’’’ With such a standard, how many college 
graduates are there who are educated ? 
President Dwight, in the same periodical, says: ‘‘ In any future development 
of the college system, the chief purpose of general culture should not give way or 
be subordinated to any purpose of special culture with a view of some special 
work in future years.’’ It is this spirit of culture for culture’s sake that has 
dominated Yale College so thoroughly in past years and which makes the insti- 
tution to-day the best type of the non-utilitarian education in America. The 
game conservatism is evinced in Professor Peck’s attitude toward education. 
The classical student with him is a ‘‘ gentleman and a scholar,’’ while the scien- 
tific student is a ‘“‘sublimated tinker.’’ No wonder that he urges the unwisdom 
of a higher education for the masses of the people. 
There is much in favor of the primary importance of mind building in educa- 
tion, and no education can be the best that makes it subordinate to the mere 
acquisition of knowledge. But the position is assumed, by those who favor the 
classical education, that utilitarian studies may not be at the same time cultural; 
that one may not get useful knowledge and mind building at the same time. 
To use President Andrews’s words: ‘Our strictures upon classical studies in 
college would have less weight were it not that these subjects crowd from the 
curriculum numerous others which would at least be equally suitable for college 
drill and incomparably more valuable later. The common opinion seems to be 
that, to be useful in disciplining the mind, matter for study must be useless for 
the purposes of life. There could be no greater error. Studies like social, polit- 
ical, physical and biological science, and modern literature and history, all of 
which are vitally important for intelligent men and women who must live and act 
their part to-day, are precisely the ones best calculated to enlarge, cultivate and 
strengthen the intellect.’’ 
The mistake that President Dwight and those who think with hira make is in 
assuming that all men are capable of the broadest and highest culture, or that a 
liberal education should be limited to those only who have such capacities. We 
urge upon the future student of medicine that he should pursue a liberal clas- 
sical course in preparation for his professional training. He replies that he has 
no aspirations and no ability to be a leader among men; he seeks only the best 
education he can get that will fit him for a more humble sphere. He skips the 
college course, and devotes all his time to his professional studies. In fact, the 
strictly classical course, such as Yale best represents at the present day, is per- 
fectly adapted for but one class of people —gentlemen of leisure, who are not 
dependent upon their daily toil for their bread. One would not ask the hod-car- 
rier to pursue a course in the ancient languages before beginning his apprentice- 
ship; nor should one require the same of the ordinary professional student. 
An an opposite extreme to the conservatism of Yale may be cited Leland 
