128 



POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



The wording of this answer was not con- 

 sidered quite correct by the attentive class* 

 and a correction was made. 



M What two kinds of judgment of extent 

 are there ? " asked the teacher. 



" The two kinds of judgment of extent are 

 common judgments of extent and scientific 

 judgments of extent." 



" What is a common judgment of extent ? " 

 and the turning of the card brought to her feet 

 a ruddy-faced young woman, who said with 

 considerable rapidity, "A common judgment 

 of extent is the knowing that one judgment of 

 extent is included in the concept of another, 

 without genu or species." 



A titter admonished her, and she hastily 

 corrected her statement: "I mean, without 

 genii or speciei." 



The answer finally accepted as 

 correct was that u a common judg- 

 ment of extent is the knowing that 

 one judgment of extent is included 

 in the judgment of another without 

 being included as a species of the 

 genus." 



Is it not lamentable to think that, 

 in these days, when science is giv- 

 ing so real a character to human 

 knowledge, such unprofitable verbi- 

 age as the above should still be foist- 

 ed upon the minds of students in our 

 most reputable educational institu- 

 tions ? As Mr. Burk very well points 

 out. the sciences of biology and an- 

 thropology have revealed the mind 

 as something subject to definite 

 though very complex laws of growth, 

 and have completely overturned the 

 mediaeval conception of it as a thing 

 organized and partitioned off accord- 

 ing to the methods of thought of 

 adult and fully self-conscious human 

 beings. All questions therefore re- 

 lating to conscience, will, and judg- 

 ment should, in relation to education 

 at least, be considered as questions of 

 phase in a developing organism, not 

 as questions of hard fact in a fully 

 and finally developed system. It is 

 satisfactory to learn that in one or 

 two institutions Mr. Burk found the 

 modern point of view fairly well 

 recognized. We hope his article will 



hasten a much-needed change in 

 pedagogic methods. 



POLITICAL BOSSISM. 



In former days people used to 

 grow restive periodically under the 

 abuses of monarchical or autocratic 

 government; and there were those 

 who fondly believed that, if mon- 

 archy as an institution could be done 

 away with and the people left free 

 to govern themselves, all political 

 troubles would cease. Well, in cer- 

 tain countries, and notably in this, 

 every vestige of monarchy in the 

 hereditary sense has been abolished ; 

 the people are free to govern them- 

 selves; and yet, judging by the dis- 

 cussions that we read in the daily 

 press, the golden age seems still to 

 delay its coming. The complaint 

 used to be that the monarch was for- 

 getful of the true interests of his 

 subjects, that too much was sacri- 

 ficed to court intrigues and private 

 favoritism; and, strange to say, we 

 hear to-day complaints which run 

 on precisely the same lines, though 

 directed against quite another class 

 of authorities. Instead of the in- 

 trigues of a court we have the in- 

 trigues of committees and their 

 managers; and just as before, but 

 perhaps to an even greater extent, 

 the people find that their real inter- 

 ests are being neglected while their 

 supposed servants, but actual rulers, 

 are assigning places and carving out 

 the public wealth with a view mainly 

 to their own convenience and the 

 perpetuation of their power. At the 

 present moment there is in this very 

 community a specially bitter outcry 

 against the evils of political bossism, 

 and thousands of worthy citizens 

 have taken counsel together in the 

 hope of casting asunder the bands 

 which they find so oppressive. If 

 they can by a prodigious effort break 

 the power of the ruling boss, things, 



