214 THE LIMITATIONS OF SCIENCE 



involved matters of doctrine rather than a change in 

 fundamental ideas. Many are simply drifting; but 

 an increasingly large number are frankly turning to 

 scientific doctrines in the hope that a deeper experi- 

 mental knowledge of the laws of man's individuality, 

 of his social relations, and of his environment will 

 bring with it the solution of the problem. And in 

 spite of our very deficient acquaintance with such laws, 

 some are proclaiming that this naturalism is the 

 surest guide for us in evolving a society nearer to the 

 ideally good. Apparently, they have the idea that 

 accurate observations and statistical records, which 

 may be formulated into scientific laws, are sufficient 

 as guides to conduct. 



A curious feature of the discussions, which have 

 arisen about these new systems of scientific ethics, is 

 that almost no attention is paid to the fundamental 

 question whether the deductions of science are suitable 

 to serve as an ethical principle for society; or even 

 whether science, except indirectly, concerns itself with 

 character; yet character, or the judging between right 

 and wrong, is necessarily the essence of all systems of 

 ethics. Now I think it can be shown that the pursuit 

 of science has for its aim to acquire power; that is, we 

 seek through science to learn the facts of nature and to 

 interfere with natural forces so as to make them serve 

 man's desires. As an illustration of the mixture of 

 truth and fallacy, which is typical of many who advo- 



