396 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 1958 
always been to seek for some kind of order, and there is magic in 
formulas. 
One fact ought not escape notice. Those who have explored most 
profoundly the field of measurement, calculation, and analysis which 
is the cornerstone of modern technology have been the first and most 
vocal group to remind us of what I have called our moral obligation. 
The physicists and mathematicians have risked social and political dis- 
favor and in some instances incurred its penalties for their insistence 
that man must be the master, not the slave, of his own technology. And 
I may add that the distinction of these Condon lectureships has been 
vastly enhanced by recognition of one such individual, Dr. 
Oppenheimer. 
Perhaps the mathematician understands more clearly than most of 
us that any enterprise of the human mind must start with certain 
assumptions. Perhaps, too, mathematicians (leaving skill aside) excel 
chiefly in the clarity with which they formulate their assumptions and 
the systematic rigor with which they examine and reexamine them and 
follow out their consequences. Unless I am mistaken, the assumptions 
with which mathematics began had their roots deep in human 
experience. 
To what degree can we apply this model to the ecology of man? I 
make the initial assumption that it is worth trying. Reviewing what 
has been presented in the earlier part of these lectures, it is clear that 
man is an expression of an infinitely long process. He is not only a part 
of that process, but has achieved a unique power to modify it, is affected 
by what he does in that respect, and is, beyond all previous degree, now 
able to know what he is doing. 
Here, then, comes the first great choice of assumptions. Shall we 
assume that the human enterprise is worth perpetuating so long as 
cosmic conditions permit, which is likely to be a long time indeed? 
Three choices are possible—disregard, denial, and affirmation, each 
fraught with fateful consequences. Our present culture is a confused 
expression of all three and could do with some of the discipline of the 
mathematician. 
It would be interesting, if space permitted, to explore the extensive 
realm of those who disregard or deny. Not all who choose to disregard 
do so from indifference. Not all who deny lack human compassion. 
And a considerable portion of both confuse the issue by presenting the 
world with issue of their own to face its assumed futility in generations 
to come! 
We are left, then, to choose the third assumption—that the human 
adventure is worth its salt. Not a bad idea, either in theory or prac- 
