222 THE LIMITATIONS OF SCIENCE 



seriously. The reason for their indifference is two- 

 fold. Rightly or wrongly, it is felt that the meta- 

 physicists are too engrossed in the exact definitions of 

 terms and in the niceties of verbal expression. They 

 thus miss or confuse the real issue of science, which is 

 to discover the significance and influence of objective 

 facts rather than of words. This does not mean that 

 the careful use of words is not important in science. 

 It is only too apparent that many of the battles of 

 science are waged over the meaning of words and not 

 of phenomena. 



The other reason for the ineffectiveness of this sci- 

 entific philosophy as developed by the metaphysicists 

 is that they are not disciplined by labor in the labora- 

 tory nor trained in the analysis and technique of 

 scientific theory. They must thus depend on elemen- 

 tary treatises, which are rarely the work of master 

 minds; or they can approach the great thinkers only 

 through the medium of popular expositions in which 

 the most scrupulous are somewhat relaxed. To con- 

 trast the opinions of Plato with Ganot does not com- 

 mand respect ; and to depend on the popular addresses 

 of a Helmholtz or a Lord Kelvin is not to know their 

 real thought. The first leads to frequent errors and 

 the second to sweeping conclusions. If we are to 

 develop a satisfactory scientific philosophy it seems 

 requisite to have it done by men trained in science and 

 conversant with philosophy ; this combination has been 



