Decembeb 28, 1906.] 



SCIENCE. 



837 



study — and he vigorously scouted the idea 

 that the usefulness of scientific truth to 

 any degree detracted from its educational 

 value. 



But none of the writers touching on 

 education, with the possible exception of 

 Froebel and Pestalozzi, not even Locke, 

 Milton or Dr. Samuel Johnson, looked at 

 the matter from the scientific standpoint 

 which takes into account: first, the physi- 

 ological laws which govern the growth and 

 development of the brain; second, the ex- 

 terior stimuli for promoting that growth 

 most successfully; and thirdly, the kind 

 and quantity of knowledge and skill one 

 must have in order to meet most completely 

 the demands of a carefully-selected occu- 

 pation. 



The history of education is full of the 

 records of whims and fancies, of experi- 

 ments real and imaginary, conducted in 

 order to prove the worthlessness of some 

 theories and the worthiness of others. 

 Every parent has a dimly-defined theory 

 of how his boy ought to be educated, and 

 every teacher looking back over his own 

 experience as a pupil formulates more or 

 less clearly a 'system' for the proper edu- 

 cation of his pupils. It goes without say- 

 ing that such theories and so-called systems 

 are generally shallow and inadequate, and 

 I say this with no disrespect to either 

 parent or teacher. I am both a parent and 

 a teacher, and I know only too well how 

 inevitably we theorize and plan, and how 

 inevitably we go astray through lack of 

 scientific guidance. 



I do not claim to have formulated the 

 science of education, and I know of no one 

 living who has ventured to make such a 

 claim; and yet I believe that a science of 

 education is possible— and it is high time 

 that we set about a systematic study of its 

 essential features with a view to a formal 

 statement of its main principles. Where 

 can that important work be begun and 



carried on more appropriately and success- 

 fully than in the American Association for 

 the Advancement of Science? Here we 

 can bring the results of long experiences 

 under a great variety of conditions, with 

 unequaled opportunities for comparison 

 and elimination. 



In his 'Tractate on Education' Milton 

 defined a complete and liberal education 

 to be that 'which fits a man to perform 

 justly, skilfully, and magnanimously all 

 the offices, private and public, of both peace 

 and war.' That is comprehensive enough, 

 yet Milton had in mind only the offices 

 which pertain to the five professions which 

 were then open to liberally educated men, 

 viz., those of the lawyer, the physician, the 

 clergyman, the soldier and the gentleman. 

 A 'gentleman' as defined by Milton was 

 one 'who retires himself to the enjoyments 

 of ease and luxury.' He had no thought 

 then, as had not the educational writers of 

 ancient or medieval days any thought, of 

 the sixth estate, the great mass of the 

 people who are coming to be the charac- 

 teristic force in the civilization of to-day, 

 viz., those actively doing the world's work, 

 the constructive and distributive, and pro- 

 viding agencies of modern life. We are 

 offering education to-day to every child, a 

 comfortable home to every family, citizen- 

 ship and self-respect to every graduate of 

 our schools. The education we must study 

 is the universal education of the American 

 people. We have put science, and ever 

 more science, into the world's work; we 

 must now give science and culture and skill 

 to the world's workers. 



When a privileged class lived in luxury, 

 relying upon the labor of slaves who were 

 purposely and sometimes legally kept un- 

 educated, and when education for culture 

 and the accomplishments of polite society 

 were natural and logical, it was not sur- 

 prising that philosophers should hold that 

 practical affairs were degrading. Seneca, 



