226 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



then very effectively introduce items that were before held in reserve. 

 In every case, inasmuch as complete narration is impossible, it is desir- 

 able to select for it such items as form a reasonably connected story, 

 dominated by a single line of interest; for in this way the attention of 

 the hearers will be much better held than by a rambling recital of dis- 

 connected items. Even in so unambitious a method of presentation as 

 the narrative, it is well to recognize that artistic form and graceful 

 phrasing deserve careful attention. These matters should not be so 

 much neglected as to give ground for the reproach, often directed 

 against the work of scientists, that their style is awkward, involved and 

 obscure, or that their interest in substance causes them to neglect form. 

 It well repays a speaker's care in these subordinate matters, if his audi- 

 ence, often more by their manner than by their words, show that they 

 have had pleasure as well as profit in listening to him. Similarly, such 

 trifles as clear enunciation and easy gestures should be cultivated from 

 the first, just as the ridiculous habit of talking to the blackboard or 

 of ... eh ... eh .. . awkwardly pausing ... eh ... eh .. . when 

 there is nothing ... eh ... eh ... to pause for, should be avoided 



Inductive Presentation. — The chief difference of inductive from 

 narrative presentation is that it does not present facts and experiences 

 in the sequence of time, but in a carefully selected order,so that a gradual 

 progress shall be made from the simplest facts at the beginning, 

 through gradually added complications, to safely established generaliza- 

 tions at the end. Personal adventures and reflections here have rela- 

 tively small place. The order in which the facts were observed and the 

 generalizations were formed is here no guide; for some of the best 

 examples of characteristic facts may have been latest found ; and a very 

 satisfactory generalization may have been reached, at least tentatively, 

 at an early date. Their inductive presentation must in such cases be 

 reversed from the order in which they were recognized. 



The peculiar value of the inductive method lies largely in the direct- 

 ness with which the speaker leads his hearers from his observations to 

 his conclusion. It is characteristically a linear method, like narration, 

 but its items are presented in order of evidence, instead of in order of 

 time. The inductive method is therefore most appropriate when one is 

 reporting upon problems of no great complexity, when a full assort- 

 ment of pertinent facts is accessible, and when the conclusion announced 

 at the end is fully substantiated by the facts that lead to it. If the facts 

 are so scanty that they must be supplemented by theory, if the con- 

 clusion appears to remain in doubt, or if no safe decision is made 

 among several alternative generalizations, then the inductive method 

 with its linear procedure, is less satisfactory than the analytical metliod, 

 next to be considered. 



The inductive method is moreover best adapted to audiences which 

 sit in the attitude of docile learners, willing to follow patiently wherever 



