192 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XLI. No. 1049 



1902. A majority of the larger departments 

 of researcli established under the direct aus- 

 pices of the institution have been effectively at 

 work for about a decade; while investigations 

 of numerous individuals, primarily connected 

 mostly with academic and other organizations, 

 have been promoted for an approximately equal 

 period of time. Thus, although this must be 

 regarded as a very short interval in the career 

 of an establishment whose history should 

 be measured by centuries, it has been long 

 enough to afford surprisingly large opportu- 

 nities for the development of ideas and ideals 

 concerning the conduct of research. In addi- 

 tion to the necessarily limited number of in- 

 vestigations actually undertaken by the insti- 

 tution, it has entertained proposals for 

 research in nearly every imaginable field of 

 abstract thought and of applied knowledge. If 

 under these circumstances the institution has 

 not learned something of the wisdom which 

 is said to arise from experience, lack of abun- 

 dance thereof can not be properly assigned 

 as a reason for so obvious a lapse. An ade- 

 quate account of this very extensive and very 

 complex experience, which, while overloaded 

 with the manifest and the impracticable, is 

 yet rich in applicable instruction, may not be 

 attempted here ; an appropriate objective treat- 

 ment would require a separate volume and 

 another author. But it may be useful to con- 

 temporaries to set down here a few salient 

 propositions, which, like those stated formally 

 in my report for 1912, have been amply veri- 

 fied. 



Thus, as regards research and the condi- 

 tions favorable thereto, it is in evidence — - 



1. That it is inimical to progress to look 

 upon research as akin to occultism and espe- 

 cially inimical to mistake able investigators 

 for abnormal men. Successful research re- 

 quires neither any peculiar conformity nor any 

 peculiar deformity of mind. It requires, 

 rather, peculiar normality and unusual pa- 

 tience and industry. 



2. That fruitful research entails, in general, 

 prolonged and arduous if not exhausting labor, 

 for which all of the investigator's time is none 

 too much. Little productive work in this 

 line may be expected from those who are ab- 



sorbingly preoccupied with other affairs. 

 Herein, as well as in other vocations, it is 

 difficult to serve two or more exacting masters. 



3. That those most likely to produce im- 

 portant results in research are those who 

 have already proved capacity for effectiveness 

 therein and who are at the some time able to 

 devote the bulk of their energies thereto. In 

 general, men are not qualified for the respon- 

 sibilities of research until they have completed 

 independently and published several worthy 

 investigations. 



4. That research, like architecture and engi- 

 neering, is increasingly eifective in propor- 

 tion as it is carefully planned and executed 

 in accordance with definite programs. A char- 

 acteristic defect of a large majority of the pro- 

 posals for research submitted to the institution 

 is a lack of tangible specifications. Esti- 

 mates, especially of time and funds essential 

 to carry out such proposals, are almost always 

 too small. Those commonly made, even by 

 skilled investigators, may be on the average 

 safely doubled. 



5. That, in spite of the most painstaking 

 foresight, research tends to expand more 

 rapidly and hence to demand a more rapid 

 increase of resources than most other realms 

 of endeavor. Its unexpected developments are 

 often more important than its anticipated re- 

 sults and new lines of inquiry often become 

 more urgent than those carefully prearranged 

 for pursuit. 



6. That it is much easier, in general, to do 

 effective work of research in the older fields of 

 inquiry than in the newer ones. It is espe- 

 cially difiicult to enter those fields in which 

 there is as yet no consensus of opinion con- 

 cerning what may be investigated and what 

 criteria may be followed. In some of the older 

 fields, however, like the so-called humanities, 

 for example, there is at present no such con- 

 sensus of opinion. If one may judge from the 

 large mass of expert but hopelessly conflict- 

 ing testimony furnished to the institution by 

 its correspondents. In such fields it appears 

 now practicable to proceed only in a some- 

 what arbitrary fashion, accomplishing here 

 and there good pieces of work regardless of 

 divided opinions or even in opposition to expert 



