Januabt 14, 1921] 



SCIENCE 



33 



versity positions and hold tliem without fur- 

 ther effort, so long as they observe all the 

 proprieties of their social caste, the rewards 

 and opportunities for carrying on research as 

 a profession are few. The government does 

 something; but it has scarcely discovered psy- 

 chology, and its methods seem devised for the 

 suppression of originality. Several founda- 

 tions, munificently endowed from the proceeds 

 of monopoly and a protective tariff, are pro- 

 viding for excellent research work; we may 

 hope that psychology will some day share the 

 spoils in case they do not involve any explicit 

 or implicit controls. The research labora- 

 tories of the industrial corporations are the 

 most promising development of recent years. 

 There are more of these than there are uni- 

 versity laboratories of physics and chemistry, 

 and they probably already surpass academic 

 work in quantity and quality, not only in 

 applied science, but also in science not ob- 

 viously or immediately useful. In this di- 

 rection the Scott Company has made a begin- 

 ning auspicious for psychology. 



But as a rule scientific men are employees 

 with a •tendency to belong to the class of 

 domestic servants rather than to the artisans 

 with well organized vmions. For not only 

 are our wages fixed by the favor of superior 

 officials, but we are expected to exhibit the 

 virtues of the domestic servant and to sub- 

 mit to similar regulations as to wash days, 

 days off, liveries, sweethearts, respectful 

 speech and the rest. This situation obtains 

 wherever scientific men are employed — in the 

 government service, in universities, in re- 

 search foundations, in industrial laboratories — 

 though these seem to represent a series of in- 

 creasing salaries and decreasing restrictions. 



It need not be considered here whether it is 

 in the interest of science and of society for 

 teachers or employed experts to form unions; 

 but it may be remarked that a point in their 

 favor is the fact that teachers are now being 

 dismissed because they belong to them. My 

 argument is that while as teachers, adminis- 

 trative officials and institutional experts we 

 are employees, as psychologists we are capi- 

 talists to the extent of our ability, original- 



ity and energy. We should form associations 

 to employ our brains in the most useful and 

 profitable ways. 



Lord Kelvin was a university professor, 

 an electrical engineer and a mathematical 

 physicist. As a teacher he received a modest 

 salary, as an inventor and expert he made a 

 large fortune, as a scientific man his reward 

 was to be president of the Eoyal Society and 

 to lose his good name as William Thomson. 

 For the latter circimistance, however, his 

 money and his lack of an heir were largely 

 responsible; Faraday did not become even a 

 Sir. Kelvin was paid inversely as the value 

 of his diverse services; but he coiild be com- 

 fortable as a teacher and command time, as- 

 sistance and equipment for research through 

 the means that he earned as an engineer. It 

 is also the case that, if his teaching had been 

 confined to research students, the three lines 

 of his work wotdd have been reciprocally 

 helpful. 



None of us is a Kelvin, but collectively we 

 do work more important in teaching, in the 

 applications of science and in research. 

 Many individuals try to do the three things, 

 but we do not have either the genius or the 

 opportunity that Kelvin had. Correspondence 

 courses, elementary text-books, pot-boilers, 

 even the administration of routine tests, are 

 not conducive to research, and may result 

 in a sweat-shop system by which regular 

 salaries are reduced below the living wage. 

 But it would be posible for us to unite to 

 use our resources for the common benefit of 

 society, of psychology and of ourselves. The 

 wage fund for teachers and experts is not 

 iixed by unrepealable economic laws, but could 

 be doubled by proper efforts. If one tenth of 

 the economic by-products of research coiild 

 be reserved for the workers, and a second 

 tenth for the support of further research, if 

 one tenth of the economic value of the appli- 

 cations of x>sychology could be paid to the 

 psychologist who does the work and a second 

 tenth be devoted to new investigations, then 

 psychological research would be supported to 

 an extent hitherto undreamed of in the his- 



