186 THE MENDEL JOURNAL 



paragraph of Miss Wodehouse's criticism "of en- 

 couraging metaphysicians to slur distinctions, to 

 draw easy a priori conclusions, and to commit sins 

 of rough and careless work," may serve well as a 

 peroration ; but, unsupported by adequate citations 

 from the article which she criticises, cannot help 

 students of natural science to strengthen their belief 

 in the existence of the scientific spirit in the methods 

 of metaphysicians. But if it is possible that meta- 

 physicians are susceptible to the wicked encourage- 

 ments of erring biologists, is it not time they resigned 

 their position alike as intellectual speculators and 

 critics ? 



If metaphysicians are swayed by extraneous and 

 irrelevant influences, what value can we attach to 

 Miss Wodehouse's criticism ? Are we justified in 

 accepting her obiter dictum concerning " the real and 

 valuable political truth which lies behind the scorn 

 thrown on environment" T It may be that we are 

 impelled to think that political convictions have in- 

 fluenced the judgement more than those harsh and 

 ugly facts which none of us like. We may be 

 driven to believe that when once Miss Wodehouse has 

 admitted the crucial fact " that mere environment is 

 truly of very little account compared with the 

 presentation to us of objects which we are prepared 

 to love," to endeavour to tone it down by the doubtful 

 hope that " a clean environment may be just the 

 chance for which the developement of a questionably 

 existing instinct of bodily comfort was waiting," 



