196 Lampiugh : Man as an Instrument of Research. 



which we personally possess ; therefore it happens not in- 

 frequently that representatives of the extreme types tend to 

 under-rate the value of the faculty in which they are deficient. 

 Thus, the investigator in whom the observational faculty is 

 dominant becomes readily mistrustful of the dexterity of his 

 fellow-worker endowed with facile powers of co-ordination and 

 ■expression. Perhaps rightly, perhaps wrongly, he may regard 

 the results as a mere display of imaginative ingenuity. His 

 own work, in turn, is looked upon with impatience by a mind of 

 the opposite type, as being nothing more than the collection 

 •of detached and meaningless scraps. 



Let us acknowledge that both views have a certain measure 

 ■of justification. It may be granted that detached observations 

 are of small consequence until their relations are understood. 

 But without them the co-ordinative mind can only raise castles 

 in the air that have no foundation, and can have no permanence. 

 Also it is often curiously evident that an intelligence fertile in 

 construction may be very deficient in discrimination, and will 

 weave bad material into the fabric along with the good. All 

 the more needful, therefore, is the co-operation of the critical 

 observer, not only to furnish new material, but likewise to 

 prevent the gathering in of any which is not of the proper 

 •standard. When thus aided and safe-guarded, it is certain that 

 the constructive imagination is a most potent instrument of 

 research, and attains results that are unattainable by any other 

 means. 



In the estimation of these temperamental qualities and their 

 relative value in scientific work, I think that we are somewhat 

 too ready, both individually and collectively, to discourage the 

 task of prolonged observation by our impatience at the tardiness 

 and dryness of its results. Individually, we reach for conclu- 

 sions before they are ripe, lest they be gathered by others. 

 Almost instinctively we cherish our ideas more than our facts, 

 being impelled thereto both by our constitution and by our 

 •education. 



We feel that in all work of observation there is an imper- 

 sonal element ; that our own impressions would be approxi- 

 mately repeated in the senses of others under the same cir- 

 cumstances ; that the instrumentality of the discoverer is 

 more or less accidental. 



Otherwise is it where the more abstract faculties of the mind 

 are concerned. Here the personality becomes all-important ; 



Naturalist, 



