50 READINGS IN EVOLUTION, GENETICS, AND EUGENICS 



them. This is so universal and far-reaching a principle that I am sure 

 I will be pardoned for illustrating it in the homeliest and tritest fashion. 

 I will do so by means of the shield with the diverse sides, giving the 

 story and construing it, however, in my own way. There is, appar- 

 ently, no limit to the amo\mt of rich marrow of truth that may be 

 extracted from thc?e dry I^ones of popular proverbs and fables by 

 patient turning and gnawing. 



We all remember, then, the famous dispute concerning the shield, 

 with its sides of different colors, which we shall here call white and 

 black. We all remember how, after vain attempts to discover the 

 truth by dispute, it was agreed to try the scientific method of investi- 

 gation. We all remember the surprising result. Both parties to the 

 dispute were right and both were wrong. Each was right from his 

 point of view, but wrong in excluding the other point of view. Each 

 was right in what he asserted, and each wrong in what he denied. 

 And the complete truth was the combination of the partial truths and 

 the elimination of the partial errors. But we must not make the mis- 

 take of supposing that truth consists in compromise. There is an old 

 adage that truth lies in the middle between antagonistic extremes. 

 But it seems to us that this is the place of safety, not of truth. This is 

 the favorite adage, therefore, of the timid man, the time-server, the 

 fence-man, not the truth-seeker. Suppose there had been on the 

 occasion mentioned above one of these fence-philosophers. He would 

 have said: "These disputants are equally intelligent and equally 

 valiant. One side says the shield is white, the other that it is black; 

 now truth lies in the middle ; therefore, I conclude the shield is gray or 

 neutral tint, or a sort of pepper-and-salt. " Do we not see that he is 

 the only man who has no truth in him? No; truth is no hetero- 

 geneous mixture of opposite extremes, but a stereoscopic combination 

 of two surface views into one solid reality. 



Now, the same is true of all vexed questions, and I have given this 

 trite fable again only to apply it to the case in hand. 



There are three possible views concerning the origin of organic 

 forms whether individual or specific. Two of these are opposite 

 and mutually excluding; the third combining and reconciling. For 

 example, take the individual. There arc three theories concerning 

 the origin of the individual. The first is that of the pious child who 

 thinks that he was made very much as he himself makes his dirt-pies; 

 the second is that of the street-gamin, or of Topsy, who says: "I was 

 not made at all, I growed"; the third is that of most intelligent 



