210 ANNUAL REPORT SMITHSONIAN INSTITUTION, 195 7 



the anomaly in due course. However, in the philosophical conflict, 

 with our technology tending to become ever more complex, and with 

 increasing specialization, unless current educational trends are re- 

 versed, the technical and nontechnical components of our society will 

 continue to travel diverging paths, with hunting oscillations not of 

 decreasing but of increasing amplitude. 



As Sarton has pointed out, "The ominous conflict of our time is the 

 difference of opinion, of outlook, between men of letters, historians, 

 philosophers, the so-called humanists, on the one side, and scientists 

 on the other." (2) Similarly, Mees has stated : 



While the relation between the progress of scientific discovery and the 

 structure of society is of the utmost interest and importance to those who desire 

 to understand it or, still more, to control the changes that are occurring, there 

 is a cleavage between those who follow the discipline of history and of the 

 humanities and those who are eagerly pursuing the quest for scientific knowl- 

 edge. Humanistic learning is the learning of the ancients ; it is a study of the 

 accumulated thought of mankind so far as it has been transmitted to us. 

 Scientific knowledge, on the other hand, is a development arising from the 

 observation of facts and their classification into patterns. The separation of 

 these two types of learning has always been unfortunate; at present it is 

 serious, and it may, indeed, be disastrous. (3) 



Many of you will recall that there is a principle in physics which 

 says that in order for energy to be transmitted efficiently from one 

 electrical network to another it is necessary that there be an im- 

 pedance match between the two circuits. Very similarly it has been 

 my experience that for the transmission of information, or more ac- 

 curately human understanding, between two individuals it is neces- 

 sary that there be a matching of backgrounds. Historically such a 

 matching has not existed between devotees of the humanities and 

 of the sciences. As far as the development and enjoyment of the 

 sciences by and for scientists are concerned, no matching is really 

 necessary. Similarly, the humanities as a discipline are completely 

 self-sufficient. If, however, the humanist chooses to use science as 

 the basis of technology designed to advance the standard of living of 

 mankind, then it becomes incumbent on the humanist to so fashion an 

 educational system that he can communicate with scientists and engi- 

 neers. This he has failed and is failing to do. Teaching less science 

 and mathematics and more art and music to scientists may enrich 

 the life of the scientist, but it will not help solve the basic problem 

 of the humanist, which is to create what he has concluded to be the 

 good society. If there is to be a sizable component of technology in 

 his good society, he must at some point face up to the problem of 

 matching impedances with the scientist. 



Let us take a look at some of the facets of this problem which 

 might have to be considered. Very early in my career as a student 



