THE INDIVIDUALITY OF ANTHROPOLOGY 493 



In our list of sciences, anthropology occupies but a modest place, 

 since it only represents a subdivision of zoology. But the animal 

 here dealt with is man and the arts to be developed in this con- 

 nection are those which deal with the actions, aims, welfare, and 

 progress of the human race. 



The table here presented requires little further development 

 to show that the alleged "failure" of science in moral matters is 

 only an indication of the comparative delay in the progress of the 

 sciences capable of defining morals as compared with the sciences 

 which flourished the better because less complex. 



The control of mankind never belonged to science, and, unfor- 

 tunately, our race is not likely to become enlightened enough in 

 this respect in the very near future. 



As soon as conditions favorable to such enlightenment arise, a 

 narrow conception of anthropology must be guarded against, for, 

 I repeat, no other science deals with the special knowledge of human 

 beings, and any misconception would impede or seriously cripple 

 its individualization. 



The individuality of anthropology is sufficiently defined by what 

 1 shall say concerning the two series of sciences; one dealing with 

 the knowledge of various kinds of phenomena and the laws which 

 govern them, while the other deals with the special knowledge of 

 each being viewed in all its complexity. 



What we call human somatology is nothing more than the study 

 of the anatomical and physiological characters of the human species 

 as compared with related species and of individual human beings 

 compared among themselves. Human anatomy and physiology are 

 essentially parts of anthropology in that they have for their aim 

 the special knowledge of human beings. They are inseparable from 

 each other, since they regard the human body and its functions 

 not only from the purely phenomological viewpoint of the general 

 sciences, but also from the viewpoint of the special knowledge of 

 human beings. 



This distinction, based upon the difference in the points of view, 

 clearly does not invalidate the results acquired by studies of this 

 kind belonging to anthropology, inasmuch as these augment the 

 special science of man. Hence many anatomists and physiologists 

 often make use of anthropology without knowing it, just as many 

 researches principally taken up with an anthropological purpose 

 can and do contribute to the progress of anatomy and physiology 

 considered as general sciences. It may even be said that such re- 

 searches, while ostensibly appearing as new problems in the field 

 of the general sciences, always contribute to anthropology. Be- 

 cause of the special importance which is attached to the smallest 

 details of the human structure and its physiology, as for example 



