SUPPLEMENT 255 



that Professor Plate and others waged an easy war 

 upon the Jesuit, when they ought to have aimed 

 their attack at the student of scientific research. In 

 my opinion Wasmann did not start with any ecclesias 

 tical prejudices, but as a scientist engaged in research 

 work, he has arrived at results which are not neces 

 sarily opposed to his religious belief. 1 



He is quite within his rights in joyfully proclaiming 

 this fact, nay, it is his duty to do so, if he desires the 

 welfare of his fellow-creatures. I may here state 

 my standpoint more definitely. The demand for 

 a clear separation between scientific research and 

 philosophy is justified only to the point, where exact 

 observation of isolated instances ceases, and leads to 

 some general result. To connect and appreciate 

 such results (which are in themselves worthless 

 either in isolation or in co-ordination) is the task of 

 philosophy, and I do not see how any progress 

 could be made, if a scientist might not be a philoso 

 pher. Separation has therefore its limits, and in my 

 opinion, in spite of the many interesting speeches 

 made by his opponents, it has not been proved that 

 Father Wasmann has outstepped these limits. 



6 1 should prefer somewhat less ecclesiastical 



1 A similar opinion is expressed by another Protestant reporter, Dr. 

 Beth, in the Neue Preussische Zeitung of May 9th. He emphatically states 

 that Wasmann s fundamental theory and general attitude with regard to 

 the doctrine of evolution need not be ascribed to any subservience on his 

 part to Church or to dogma, but have in his case the same empirical founda 

 tion as in the case of a number of modern scientists, who cannot be accused 

 of rejecting Darwinism in its more special sense, in order to avoid incurring 

 episcopal censure, or acting in a way contrary to dogmatic tradition. 



