METHODS OF THE EARTH-SCIENCES 485 



on such regenerative lines would bring forth results in harmony with 

 geological evidences, with which the well-known conclusions here- 

 tofore reached seem to be at fatal variance. 



The earth-sciences are not purely physical sciences. They con- 

 cern themselves with life and with mentality, as well as with rocks, 

 ocean, and atmosphere. Our group is exceptionally comprehensive in 

 the range of its subjects. Our methods should hence be such as to 

 encompass the whole field. They should give us ultimately a com- 

 plete working system of thought relative to all the earth is or holds. 

 In some sense the earth-sciences must come to comprehend the es- 

 sentials of all the sciences. At least as much as any other scientists, 

 we are interested in the fundamental assumptions of all the sciences, 

 and in their consistent application. To touch hastily this broader 

 field, I choose a second illustration of the method of regenerative 

 hypotheses from the relations between the assumptions of science 

 and the conclusions of science. 



As our working basis, we assume that our perceptions represent 

 reality, when duly directed and corrected, but that error and illusion 

 lurk on all sides and must be scrupulously avoided. We assume 

 that we are capable of detecting error and of demonstrating truth; 

 and that, as requisite means, we have choice, and some measure of 

 volitional command over ourselves and over nature. 



Starting thus with assumptions that embrace choice and the pos- 

 sibility of error, and going out into physical research, most of us 

 have concluded that antecedents are followed rigorously by their 

 consequents. Going out a step further into the chemico-biological 

 field and noting the close interrelations between physical and vital 

 phenomena, many of us have been led to a belief in their ultimate 

 identity. Going out a step further into the mental field, not a few 

 of us have concluded that an unvarying sequence of antecedents 

 and consequents reigns here also. But this seems to contradict 

 the assumptions with which we started. Our primary assumptions 

 embraced choice, volitional control, and the alternative of reaching 

 truth or falling into error according to our self-directed discrimination. 



What is to be done in the face of this seeming contradiction? The 

 method of regenerative hypotheses answers that a new set of 'assump- 

 tions begotten of the contradictory conclusion should be made the 

 basis of a new inquiry, and, if possible, of a new working hypothesis. 

 Instead of the usual assumption of choice, and of the possible alter- 

 native of reaching truth or falling into error, let the assumption be 

 that all acts of the mind are parts of a rigorous chain of antecedents 

 and consequents. Let it be assumed that no swerving from the 

 predetermined sequences is possible, that every thought and every 

 act follows its antecedents with absolute rigor, no real choice, or 

 volition, or alternative between accuracy and error, being possible. 



