76 THE THIRD YEARBOOK 



availed himself of the advantages offered by these qualities. But 

 it is conceivable that the development of the automobile and its 

 successors may seriously disturb, if not entirely change, the rela- 

 tionship that has heretofore existed between man and the horse. 

 Similarly, the housefly is worse than useless ; it is injurious in its 

 habit of feeding, which makes it a carrier of disease. But the 

 ultimate solution of this difficulty will likely be through the dis- 

 covery of some means of destroying the disease germ rather than 

 in the utter destruction of all the flies. If the germs can be con- 

 trolled, the flies will become harmless. It is evident, therefore, that 

 the study of man and the other forms of life must be done in the 

 light of some other relationship of a more fundamental character. 

 No one will claim that the study of nature as a novelty can ever 

 do more than afford entertainment for a passing hour. Nor is the 

 training of the senses an ultimate reason. For, as it has been 

 stated already, we do not study nature so much because we wish 

 to train the senses as we do because we wish the senses to train 

 the man. In this function, other things not usually classed as 

 natural objects may play an important part. 



As to the claims for a training in accuracy that comes with 

 dealing with the realities of nature, it may be said that in this the 

 demands of science are not unique. Accuracy is required in all 

 the relations of life, and its importance is far more evident in the 

 dealings between man and man than it is in the enumeration of 

 the legs of a beetle. If the claims of science are to rest upon 

 practical grounds, then what is to be said of the study of the 

 thousand and one things in nature that interest the children, and 

 older students too, which cannot by any stretch of the imagination 

 be ranked with the so-called practical aspects of our lives? And, 

 lastly, if we assert that nature is an eternal verity worthy in itself 

 of study, are we not assuming the proposition which it might be 

 conceived to be the business of science to prove? 



If I have not misstated nor overstated the case, we find our- 

 selves confronted with a difficult problem in education toward the 

 solution of which but little has been done. It is evident, too, that 

 until some common ground is reached upon which the two great 

 divisions of learning, the humanities and science, may stand, we 

 shall always find the parts of our curriculum at cross-purposes. 

 If we are to unravel the difficulties of the situation, we must begin 



