838 STUDIES FOR STUDENTS 
jects, indeed it presents few of any other class. There is prob- 
ably no field of thought which is not sufficiently rich in such 
subjects to give full play to investigative modes of study. 
Three phases of mental procedure have been prominent in 
the history of intellectual evolution thus far. What additional 
phases may be in store for us in the evolutions of the future it 
may not be prudent to attempt to forecast. These three phases 
may be styled the method of the ruling theory, the method of 
the working hypothesis, and the method of multiple working 
hypotheses. 
In the earlier days of intellectual development the sphere of 
knowledge was limited and could be brought much more nearly 
than now within the compass ofa single individual. As a natural 
result those who then assumed to be wise men, or aspired to be 
thought so, felt the need of knowing, or at least seeming to 
know, all that was known, as a justification of their claims. So 
also as a natural counterpart there grew up an expectancy on 
the part of the multitude that the wise and the learned would 
explain whatever new thing presented itself. Thus pride and 
ambition on the one side and expectancy on the other joined 
hands in developing the putative all-wise man whose knowledge 
boxed the compass and whose acumen found an explanation for 
every new puzzle which presented itself. Although the pre- 
tended compassing of the entire horizon of knowledge has long 
since become an abandoned affectation, it has left its representa- 
tives in certain intellectual predilections. As in the earlier days, 
so still, it is a too frequent habit to hastily conjure up an expla- 
nation for every new phenomenon that presents itself. Inter- 
pretation leaves its proper place at the end of the intellectual 
procession and rushes to the forefront. Too often a theory is 
promptly born and evidence hunted up to fit in afterward. Laud- 
able as the effort at explanation is in its proper place, it is an 
almost certain source of confusion and error when it runs before 
a serious inquiry into the phenomenon itself. A strenuous 
endeavor to find out precisely what the phenomenon really is 
should take the lead and crowd back the question, commend- 
