578 



SCIENCE 



[N. S. Vol. XXXIII. No. 850> 



Me. a. Feanklin Shull, assistant in zool- 

 ogy in Columbia University, has been ap- 

 pointed acting assistant professor of zoology 

 at the University of Michigan, to succeed Dr. 

 A. S. Pearse, who has gone to the University 

 of Manila. 



Me. Dunham Jackson, now studying at 

 Gottingen on a Harvard traveling fellowship, 

 has been appointed instructor in mathematics 

 at Harvard University. 



At the Normal College, New York City, 

 Charles T. Kirk, instructor, has been pro- 

 moted to be assistant professor of geology, 

 and Miss Emily O. Long, to be assistant pro- 

 fessor of botany. 



DISCUSSION AND COSSESPONDENCE 



THE METHOD OF SCIENCE, A REPLY 



A RECENT number of Science (January 27, 

 1911), has a forceful address by Dr. Minot on 

 the " Method of Science." It is a new pre- 

 sentation of a topic fully discussed from the 

 attitude of pre-evolutionary thought, but in 

 such a manner and from such premises that 

 its logic can not serve as a basis of present 

 problems. I do not have the feeling of disre- 

 spect for the old thought that Dr. Minot 

 seemingly has, but I agree with him that its 

 principles and methods give little help in 

 solving the problems science now faces. But 

 at this point our differences begin, for in his 

 restatement of principles, admirable as it is, 

 he cuts the ground from under the social sci- 

 ences by putting up standards that they can 

 not meet. I do not think he meant to do this, 

 yet the feeling he shows against the old phi- 

 losophy warrants the inference that he would 

 pass a similar judgment on the results of so- 

 cial science. 



A new statement of the laws of thought is 

 certainly needed. Early logic was devised by 

 the theologians to prove the existence of super- 

 sensual units. As instruments for this end 

 the so-called laws of thought are effective. 

 But we need other rules to solve present prob- 

 lems. Not only is this so, but the methods of 

 investigation have been so altered during the 

 past fifty years as to create new problems. 

 Accurate measurements are a new device. 



There were cases of accurate measurement be- 

 fore the present epoch, but they were not 

 numerous enough to create a peculiar type of 

 reasoning and thus to force a revision of the 

 rules of logic. 



The old division was between inductive and 

 deductive logic. This controversy is now 

 practically dead and in its place is arising one 

 between inductions based on observation and 

 those on experiment. Observations are gen- 

 eralizations under complex conditions, while 

 experiment means isolation, simplicity of en- 

 vironment and accurate measurement. Work- 

 ers in physical science distrust observations 

 and demand in their place carefully verified 

 results. This change is not a matter of 

 theory, but due to practical situations faced 

 by scientists in their various fields. The new 

 medicine of which Dr. Minot is so good a 

 representative gives an excellent illustration 

 of the situation that forces him to attempt a 

 reformulation of the laws of thought. The 

 old practitioner was an observer : he diagnosed 

 cases from symptoms. The new school ex- 

 periments and measures. To say that science 

 is exact measurement means practically to 

 shut out the old physician who carried his 

 knowledge in his head and whose office was 

 not a chemical laboratory. 



But if the laws of thought needed to shut 

 diagnosis out of medicine are formulated as 

 general laws, rules are set up that exclude all 

 social judgments derived from observation. 

 The tendency to do this is already visible in 

 biologic sociology whose premises are taken 

 bodily from biology. Bold deductions are 

 made and conclusions drawn that sweep aside 

 all generalizations based on observation. Here 

 is a sample of reasoning of which we will have 

 many more if Dr. Minot's rules of thinking 

 win acceptance. I quote from a recent maga- 

 zine article. " No generalization has ever 

 exercised such a far-reaching effect on thought 

 as the theory of natural selection. It is hardly 

 necessary to point out that the corresponding 

 belief in sociology is that all progress must 

 come from the gifted individual, from the 

 ' sport ' who survives as the best of his kind. 

 Darwinism lays stress not on the democratic 



