PSYCHE. 



ON THE RELATION BETWEEN SCIENTIFIC AND ECONOMIC 



ENTOMOLOGY. 



BY CHARLES W. WOOD WORTH, FAYETTEVILLE, ARK. 



[Annual address of the retiring president of the 



The subject of this address is not of 

 the kind usually chosen for similar occa- 

 sions but is of none the less interest and 

 importance. It is one also that is in full 

 harmony with the genius of this society 

 which is the recognition of the preemi- 

 nence of what is called the philosophy 

 of science. Another reason makes it of 

 especial immediate importance to us. 

 Economic entomology is upon the verge 

 of an era of great advancement. The 

 establishment of the agricultural ex- 

 periment stations have added to its ranks 

 more young men of scientific training 

 and ability perhaps than have ever en- 

 gaged in this line of investigation. If 

 economic entomology is but a phase of 

 scientific entomology then we want to 

 put forth especial efforts to assimilate 

 this young blood in our ranks ; if on the 

 other hand they are different and distinct, 

 the difference will become more and 

 more apparent as economic entomology 

 develops and we should define our posi- 

 tion as on the side of pui - e science. 



I believe that the pure sciences are 

 distinct from the economic sciences ; that 

 this is the primary division of science. 

 We seem to be prone in this utilitarian 



Cambridge Entomological Club, 9 January, 1S91.] 



age to try to find excuse for the pursuit 

 of pure science by holding up the possi- 

 bility of applying our discoveries for 

 economic ends. Let us recognize and 

 not act as though we were ashamed of 

 the fact that the sole aim of the student 

 of pure science is the discovery of truth, 

 catering to human wants being entirely 

 out of his province. 



It may be said that laying aside this 

 matter of sentiment, the human wants 

 are supplied through the discoveries of 

 science and that this is simply the appli- 

 cation of science for economic purposes, 

 or, to put it a little stronger, that econom- 

 ics are but applied sciences. Such a 

 statement comes from the conception 

 that facts are or in some way become the 

 peculiar property of a science. This is 

 not the case however. Perhaps if we 

 could see all the intimate relations 

 sciences have to each other we should 

 say that every fact belongs to every 

 science ; at any rate we could scarcely 

 name a fact which when closely viewed 

 has not more than one bearing. An ex- 

 ample of the far reaching character of 

 a fact is that of the origin of species 

 through evolution. When Darwin es- 



