496 SOMATOLOGY 



of characters are combined in the mineral in certain ways which 

 determine the specific properties of that mineral. 



To obtain a suitable knowledge of such a mineral therefore re- 

 quires a special and concrete study adapted to the complex nature 

 of the object to be investigated. The mineralogist applies his geo- 

 metrical, mechanical, and physio-chemical knowledge, together 

 with the perception of relations and position. In order to acquire 

 knowledge concerning such a mineral adapted to its particular 

 and complex nature, to learn its special characteristics as compared 

 with other minerals, and to understand its uses as well as employ 

 it usefully, this combination of the concrete sciences is absolutely 

 necessary. 



It were distressing to imagine a mineralogy whose individualization 

 were as incomplete as it yet is in the case of anthropology. Were 

 such the case, we might find mineralogists relinquishing the study of 

 crystalline forms to the geometricians, or, in order not to infringe 

 upon the rights of the chemist, to avoid the study of the chemical 

 composition of minerals, and so on. 



I do not believe that such freakish doings will ever occur in min- 

 eralogy. We cannot be as sanguine in anthropology, especially if 

 the intimate relations which exist between somatological characters 

 and the mental makeup are misunderstood or overlooked. An in- 

 completely individualized anthropology would no more deserve the 

 name of science than would a mineralogy devoted merely to the 

 consideration of mineralogical characters. A human category or a 

 human being represents a complexus of several kinds of phenom- 

 ena, and this complexus must be differentiated from analogous 

 though not similar complexuses. Furthermore, not only must these 

 differences be noted, they must also be explained. Without such 

 interpretation there may exist museums or even chairs of anthro- 

 pology, but not an anthropology; not that anthropology which 

 answers to the mandate yvuQt crtavrdv, and from which, together with 

 sociology, the anthropotechnical arts await the light of which they 

 stand so greatly in need. Without this scientific light the intense 

 efforts of societies against moral progress would amount to a futile 

 and perhaps dangerous movement. At the basis of every social 

 question, anthropological problems will be found, but we know how 

 valueless the immature responses of an incompletely organized 

 anthropology are. 



In short, it is the anatomical point of view which is neglected 

 or limited to the consideration of characters which are of no im- 

 portance physiologically; it is the psychological point of view, or 

 even the sociological one, as if there were not the most intimate 

 relations between the physical conformation and the intellectual 

 or moral characters, or even as if the latter bore no relations to 



