652 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. XIX. No.< 



in satisfactorily, and to have lopped off the 

 remainder. And if any one wishes to 

 learn whether these different things are 

 considered pedagogical equivalents, just 

 let him read the prefaces of these books! 



3. The usual college entrance require- 

 ment in biology at present is ' one year of 

 some laioratory science'! Surely this is 

 broad enough to meet the demands of 

 pioneer conditions. 



What Ave have settled among ourselves 

 appears to be that it is worth while to study 

 living things at first hand. Since we may 

 not do more, let us congratulate ourselves 

 that we have progressed thus far, and pull 

 ourselves together for a new start. 



Wliat of biology shall be taught in the 

 high school? Is not this a pedagogic ques- 

 tion? Yes, as are aE questions of fitting 

 subject matter to the receptivity of the 

 developing mind. Is it not also a seien- 

 tifie question? Yes, as science must ad- 

 judge the worth of the subject matter. 

 But biological education is more than either 

 pedagogy or science — more than details of 

 instruction, or biological phenomena. It 

 must be in the long run orderly and pro- 

 gressive development toAvard fitness for the 

 activities of life. The place and portion 

 of biology in the curriculum will not be 

 detel-mined by the dictum of the colleges, 

 or the preferences of the schools, or the 

 methodology of philosophers, but by the 

 operation of natural laAvs chiefly, the laAV 

 of natural selection. If biological teach- 

 ing survive in the high school or anywhere 

 else, it will survive by reason of its fitness 

 as a part in the preparation for life. 

 Therefore, we must never lose sight of the 

 peculiai'ly intimate relations biology bears 

 to human life. On the practical side, what 

 other subject can compare with one whose 

 chief practical applications are: 



First, living in this world— hygiene, in 

 its very broadest application, including all 



personal control over the welfare of body 

 and mind. 



Second, getting the materials of liveli- 

 hood— agricultMre in its very broadest ap- 

 plication, including all that relates to our 

 dependence on the organic life of the 

 Avorld. 



Third, medicine — the healing art, some- 

 times mistakenly called the principal appli- 

 cation of biology. 



I Avill not mention the multitude of 

 newer applications arising on every hand 

 and making ever-increasing demands for 

 Imowledge of the facts and principles of 

 life. 



Out of these relations there groAv, I 

 think, four incontestable reasons why 

 every one should study biology: 



1. To know animals and plants better. 

 We have to deal with them in life. We 

 should know how to protect our friends 

 and combat our enemies among them, and 

 to appreciate the place in the world of 

 all of them. The ancient poetic Adsion of 

 creation ends with the statement concern- 

 ing every living thing, 'To you it shall be 

 for meat.' 



2. To knoAV our environment better, not 

 alone its economic, but also its esthetic 

 side: to know the charm of life, its won- 

 derful beauty of color and form, its grace 

 of motion, its adaptation to place and func- 

 tion. Here poets and naturalists and 

 artists alike have found themes since the 

 beginning of civilization. 



3. To knoAAf ourselves better— possessors 

 of animal bodies, that are subject to the 

 same laAvs, that are moved by the same 

 instincts and that feel the same neces- 

 sities as other animal bodies, and on the 

 normal healthful activity of which all our 

 possibilities of happiness and usefulness in 

 life depend. 



4. To know something of the develop- 

 ment of life in the world, and thus to get 

 acquainted Avith those general develop- 



