+ PROCEEDINGS OF THE ROYAL SOCIETY OF QUEENSLAND. 
interpretations, it is true, which appear fanciful and extrava- 
gant in the light of modern knowledge but which were not 
unreasonable at the time they were put forward. It may 
quite well be argued that Greek scientific method was not, as 
is commonly believed, pure metaphysical speculation, but 
rather the modern method in its early stages of development. 
The formulation of hypotheses to explain observations, one of 
the main features of modern work, was certainly practised 
by the Greeks and probably originated with them; for 
there is nothing to suggest that Babylonian or. Egyptian 
science was anything more than an accumulation of 
observed facts. It should be borne in mind, however, that 
the Greek showed little sign of realizing the necessity of 
step-by-step progress. Throughout the whole course of 
Greek Natural Science we find a tendency to base a big 
generalization on a few observations; there is very little 
of that gradual building up of scientific theory that is 
characteristic of modern work, but there are constant 
attempts to pass from preliminary observation to final law 
of nature by great flights of the imagimation. Science in 
its early days was afflicted by that common infirmity of 
youth, the desire to hurry on to the goal by short cuts; 
it was not until age and experience added caution and 
hard work to the brilliance and enthusiasm of youth that 
any lasting progress was made. It seems probable, how- 
ever, that the main cause of the ultimate sterility of 
Greek Science was not so much rashness in the formulation 
of hypotheses as failure to check hypotheses by means of 
further observation or experiment. It is not strictly true 
to say that the test experiment was absolutely unknown, 
but it is certain that it was rare; in its absence hypotheses 
were apt to become extravagant, and, moreover, their 
authors were forced back on to metaphysical arguments 
in defence of them. Thus metaphysics gradually expelled 
experience from scientific work till, in the Middle Ages, 
Science was practically smothered under a mass of meaning- 
less verbiage which had little relationship to reality. 
Yet while realizing this the modern scientist should 
be cautious in his eriticism of his predecessors in ancient 
or medieval times. It is easy nowadays to laugh at the 
old idea that the circle is the only perfect curve and 
therefore the paths of the planets must be described in 
