64 



NATURE 



[September 27, 191; 



the " Mig-ht is Right " doctrine. The arg^ument 

 ag-ainst which the author advances somewhat 

 heavy g-uns has been previously shattered by 

 Dr. Chalmers Mitchell and others, but it is 

 interesting- to see it crumble under French fire. 



According- to the theory, the power of conquer- 

 ing- in battle is the biolog-ical basis of Right, for 

 does not evolution mean progress, and has not 

 selection by means of struggle been the essential 

 factor in evolution? To this Prof. Anthony 

 replies: (i) that evolution is not necessarily a 

 march in the direction of progress; (2) that the 

 selection which results from intra-specific and 

 inter-specific struggle does not appear to have 

 more than an accessory rdle in evolution ; 

 (3) that the selection resulting from intm-specific 

 struggle, even when this is competitive without 

 actual combat, tends to accelerate processes lead- 

 ing to extinction (progressive specialisation and 

 progressive increase in size), and does not 

 necessarily increase the chances of victory in 

 inter-specTfic struggle ; and (4) that only that form 

 of selection which results from vital competition 

 without combat can help a species to a more 

 complete realisation of its intrinsic tendencies, 

 and that what gives the victory is not superiority 

 in the power of destroying, but superiority in 

 utilising the resources of life. 



Prof. Anthony has not taken advantage, as he 

 might have done, of some previous analyses of 

 the various modes of selection, nor even of Dar- 

 win's insistence on the subtlety of the concept of 

 the struggle for existence ; but his own line of 

 argument is interesting. As it seems to us, how- 

 ever, he pulls his bow far too tightly in his 

 refusal to recognise the quality of " progress " in 

 animate evolution, in his depreciation of the impor- 

 tance of natural selection, and in his theory that 

 intra-specific struggle tends to accelerate pro- 

 cesses that make for extinction. He exaggerates 

 elements of truth until they become positively 

 fallacious. J, A. T. 



Founders' Day in War Time. By Sir Adolphus 

 W. Ward. Pp. 55. (Manchester : At the 

 University Press; London: Longmans; Green 

 and Co., 1917.) Price is. 6d. net. 

 Many readers will be glad to have in this 

 convenient and - permanent form the address 

 delivered by Sir A. W. Ward, formerly Vice- 

 Chancellor of the University of Manchester, on 

 March 23 last, at a memorial service for mem- 

 bers of the University who have fallen in the war. 

 After explaining the high office of education as 

 " the drawing out, and bringing to a beneficent 

 growth and increase, what has been implanted by 

 nature, aided by circumstance," the address out- 

 lines the growth and development of Manchester 

 University from the time when, in the year 

 before that of the outbreak of the Great Civil War, 

 Henry Fairfax petitioned the Long Parliament 

 for the establishment of a northern university, 

 down to the present day. The members of the 

 University who study the address will value 

 increasingly the privilege of their association with 

 so worthy an institution. 



NO. 2500, VOL. 100] 



LETTERS TO THE EDITOR. 

 [The Editor does not hold himself responsible for 

 opinions expressed by his correspondents. Neither 

 can he undertake to return, or to correspond with 

 the writers of, rejected ^nanuscripts intended for 

 this or any other part of Nature. No notice is 

 taken of anonymous communications. \ 



Sheli-shock and its Lessons. 



In Nature of September 6 there appeared, under 

 the enigmatic title, "'The Psychopathy of the Barbed 

 Wire," an exceptionally lengthy review of our little 

 book on '■ Shell-shock and its Lessons." In it Sir 

 Robert Armstrong-Jones makes no reference whatso- 

 ever to the main themes to which practically the 

 whole of the book is devoted. These are, first, the 

 vital importance, in dealing with cases of illness due 

 primarily to specific anxieties and mental conflicts 

 (whether these are caused by the terrifying experiences 

 of warfare or the worries of civil life), of discovering 

 the real nature and causes of these anxieties and con- 

 flicts ; and, secondly, the urgent need for the estab- 

 lishment of clinics in which patients atiflicted with 

 mental disturbance can be treated while they are still 

 sane. 



This omission of all reference to the real substance 

 of our book, to the topics with which it is primarily 

 concerned from the first page to the last, is a curious 

 commentary on the fairness of his review. 



Instead of giving a real account of the scope 

 of the book, he seizes upon a series of relatively 

 unimportant points — so far as their bearing upon the 

 aims of the work is concerned — and with almost un- 

 failing regularity attributes to us statements which we 

 have never made. As Nature has given currency to 

 these misrepresentations, we feel bound to ask for the 

 opportunity of correcting them seriatim. 



So far as the scientific readers of Nature are con- 

 cerned, we could confidently leave the inconsistencies 

 of the review to tell their own tale ; but the points at 

 issue relate to far-reaching questions of public policy 

 upon which action has to be taken by men who might 

 perhaps be influenced and confirmed in their inertia 

 by this review. 



When we are accused of tending to dwell unduly 

 upon the value of suggestion, hypnotism, and "psycho- 

 analysis," we are forced to doubt whether your re- 

 viewer has read what we have said upon these subjects. 

 I<"or we took particular care to emphasise the strict 

 limitations to the usefulness of hypnotism. Only two 

 pages of our book deal with "psycho-analysis," and 

 most of what we have written on the subject consists of 

 a discussion of the various meanings of this term. 



But why is no reference made by your reviewer 

 to the vitally important subject of psychological 

 analysis and re-education, to Which a whole chapter 

 is devoted? 



As regards the question of dream-analysis, which 

 we have also been accused of unduly emphasising, 

 with the experience gained during the last three years 

 In many hundreds of cases of "shell-shock" It is safe 

 to say that the physician who does not analyse his 

 patient's dreams In certain cases must Inevitably fail 

 to diagnose the real cause that Is at the root of all 

 the trouble. A typical instance has been reported in 

 detail by Dr. W. H. R. Rivers In the Lancet of 

 August 18, p. 237, and we could cite scores of similar 

 cases from our own experience. Your reviewer's 

 charge that we have dwelt unduly on dream-anajvsis 

 can only mean that he is not acquainted with the 

 important work that has been done in this field, and 

 the extensive use that has been made of a measure 

 I proved to be quite invaluable for diagnosis and rational 

 ' treatment. 



