METHOD IN SCIENCE 3 



position attained by the orthodox. Nevertheless, from 

 time to time there arises the necessity of revising not only 

 accepted doctrines, but also the methods by which they 

 are reached. It seems as if such an hour had now come 

 round, for in many of the sciences the accumulation of facts 

 long ago passed reasonable limits, while those who have an 

 insatiable passion for their collection display little energy 

 in putting them into order. Moreover, they appear to 

 resent, or at the least to deprecate, any such attempt on 

 the part of others. According to many " now " is never the 

 accepted time for a new hypothesis, although true method 

 is the application and adaptation of the whole apparatus of 

 reasoning to any given problem. Little has been done to 

 elucidate it, but it surely implies the use of every weapon of 

 analysis in order to avoid all possible waste of available 

 energy. For any advance in thought implies an intelligent 

 logical use of foresight and surmise, and without them 

 science must become at last a mere rubbish heap. Over- 

 insistence on facts and perpetual discouragement of think- 

 ing atrophy the imagination, without which the most 

 diligent seeker after truth must presently perish in the pit 

 he has digged for himself. Such resemble a man who 

 makes bricks, and resents the architect and builder using 

 them. This revolt against acknowledged logical methods 

 has sometimes had its justification, but with the general 

 progress of knowledge the life of a radically unsound hypo- 

 thesis is usually a very short one. If Herbert Spencer's 

 idea of a tragedy was a hypothesis killed by a fact, such 

 tragedies must grow rater if it is recognized that know- 

 ledge is only knowledge, and a fact only a fact, when both 

 agree with what is certain in other sciences, and contradict 

 no general principles. 



The evil results of extreme specialism, combined with a 



