10 WHAT IS SCIENCE ? 



Here no doubt the more general use is clearly distinguished 

 from the more special, but some misunderstandings about 

 the science that we are going to consider probably arise 

 from this double use of the word. 



SCIENCE AND NATURE 



^ But why were these special branches of learning called 

 " natural " ? Not because they were more natural, in 

 the conversational sense, than any other, or even in the 

 Shakespearean sense (which means idiotic) ; but because 

 they were regarded as being especially concerned with 

 nature. And what is meant by " nature," and how 

 is science especially concerned with it ? The term 

 " nature " has never been used in a very precise sense 

 capable of accurate definition, but it seems generally 

 to be employed in contradistinction to man ; nature, 

 we may say roughly, is everything in the world that is 

 not human. Nature is regarded as the antagonist of 

 man, the obstacle which he has to overcome and the 

 enemy he has to fight, although he may sometimes turn 

 the enemy into a friend by judicious action. This idea 

 will be found, I think, to underlie most uses of the word. 

 It is true that sometimes, and more particularly in the 

 middle of the last century, man has been regarded as 

 part of nature ; for instance, one of Huxley's best-known 

 books is called " Man's Place in Nature " ; but the view 

 that man was part of nature was felt to be rather hetero- 

 dox and startling, an overthrowing of many preconceived 

 beliefs ; indeed, the phrase was used by Huxley largely 

 in order to challenge accepted opinion. 



Again, the opposition of nature and man is reflected 

 in the terms used to distinguish the branches of pure 

 learning which were most clearly separated from science. 

 They were termed " moral " philosophy or science. Now 

 " morals," even in the very general -sense attributed to 



