NURTURE VERSUS NATURE 



jections to its supposed implications, on senti- 

 mental grounds. 



Much of the opposition has died away in re- 

 cent years, showing a very remarkable modifica- 

 tion of public sentiment. But even now it is not 

 unusual to hear the feasibility of any attempted 

 application of eugenic principles challenged, on 

 the ground that nature, having been in the busi- 

 ness of matchmaking from time immemorial, is 

 very well able to carry on this business without 

 interference from the scientific students of 

 heredity. 



Such objections are reminiscent of the thought 

 of an elder day, when the current phrase about 

 marriage being made in heaven was taken more 

 than half seriously, and when the entire attitude 

 of mind of the public toward the question of the 

 relations of the sexes was far more puritanical 

 than it is at present. 



Many causes have conspired to change public 

 sentiment; and the very fact that the name 

 "eugenics" has made its way so rapidly proves 

 that the intelligent moiety of the public has be- 

 come prepared to give recognition to the idea that 

 man may conceivably exercise a directive influ- 

 ence in the breeding of his own race such as he has 

 all along exercised in the breeding of the animals 

 that he has domesticated. 



The argument that nature herself is the ideal 

 matchmaker is seen on the slightest critical in- 

 spection to be utterly fallacious; in particular 

 since it has come to be known that hundreds of 



[305] 



