4 SCIENCE 
the Hohenzollern dynasty to lead us to be- 
lieve that religion is the determining factor 
in establishing the prevailing German atti- 
tude regarding war as the justifiable 
method of extending their assumed supe- 
riority. The members of the Kaiser’s fam- 
ily may sincerely believe, because they have 
been educated to believe, in their divine 
rights and affiliations; but it is impossible 
that traditional religion has played more 
than a minor part in developing the clearly 
evolutionary philosophy of German supe- 
riority that has spread centrifugally from 
the universities, especially through the in- 
fluence of many writers who were not liable 
to classification as religiously inclined. 
Perhaps the religion of the people of the 
masses has led them to accept as a religious 
idea the doctrine of superiority made by 
German evolutionary thinkers and spread 
broadeast by the means of an educational 
system that with marvelous skill was 
planned to promulgate and ultimately to 
put into world-wide practise the clearly 
evolutionary doctrine of German superior- 
ity over the rest of mankind. 
In-biological philosophy intellectual Ger- 
many seems to find good in this war, and 
indeed in all wars, as a means of express- 
ing force or might of the state, which in the 
German national philosophy is always right 
because the fittest win in the struggle. 
Of course it matters not, so far as we are 
inquiring into the possible influence of bio- 
logical philosophy on human welfare, that 
numerous German biologists and philoso- 
phers have accepted an evolution factor 
whose Allmacht has long been denied by 
the great majority of biologists outside of 
Germany. For our present purposes the 
fact is that, whether right or wrong, a bio- 
logical theory has been made to support a 
national state of mind which is now threat- 
ening the very foundations of human wel- 
'N. S. Vou. XLVIII. No. 1227 
fare. Of course it is beside the point, but 
to a biologist an interesting question, 
whether Neo-Darwinism has ‘been widely ac- 
cepted by the intellectuals of Germany be- 
cause of scientific facts in its favor or be- 
cause it fitted in with a previously accepted 
doctrine of right determined by might. Be 
that as it may, the one conclusion I wish to 
draw from the German philosophy of 
superiority is that we should find an im- 
portant lesson in the fact that a theory 
largely zoological in its origin and in its 
human applications has been brought into 
conflict with human welfare as we Ameri- 
cans see it with the larger vision. 
I have arrived now at my main thesis 
that only through organized: education can 
the physical and intellectual values of zool- 
ogy be made to contribute to human wel- 
fare in the largest sense. The fact that the 
German superior state of mind to which we 
object was developed by national education, 
and education thus worked against human 
welfare, is obviously no argument against 
education, but only against a phase of edu- 
cation limited to the purposes of those in 
power. 
I. ZOOLOGY AND EUGENICS 
I come now to the relation of zoology to 
racial welfare, in other words, the problem 
of eugenics. It is evident that the appli- 
cation of the laws of heredity or genetics 
to the breeding of more useful animals is 
simply another aspect of economic zoology ; 
and one whose total financial value is bound 
to continue to be greater than that of all 
other phases of practical zoology combined. 
We need only compare in cursory survey 
any of our valuable cultivated or domesti- 
cated strains of the animals and plants of 
agriculture with the most closely related 
wild forms in order to realize the vast eco- 
nomic significance of man’s applications of 
known and unknown principles of heredity. 
