532 



SCIENCE. 



[N. S. Vol. V. No. 118. 



abandoned the hypothesis of faculties, and 

 studies the self, the soul as a unit. This dis- 

 cussion assumes the constancy of the ag- 

 gregate of soul energy and its non- correla- 

 tion with radiant energy ; in other words, 

 the number of units of soul energy, iiotential and 

 kinetic, is constant. The radical diiference 

 then between the educated and the illiterate 

 is in the ratio of potential to kinetic power. 



This defines the province of the school, 

 which is to furnish proper stimuli to render 

 active and available the possible, inherent 

 and inherited energy. 



There is little debate regarding the order 

 of succession, and the dependence of the 

 forms of mental activity. Admitting that 

 nearly every form seems to be involved or 

 implied in every other form it is cus- 

 tomary and convenient to speak of these 

 forms as separate. Following this order, 

 the first end sought in an educative proce- 

 dure is to effect a sensorial modification, i. e., 

 to produce a definite change in the cortical 

 cells, which change automatically induces a 

 corresponding change in the self or the soul 

 and gives it form or experience, or the pre- 

 condition of knowledge. 



These partial and vague experiences, 

 percepts, must be related, interpreted ; they 

 must receive meaning which is put into them 

 by virtue of their relations to previous and 

 correlated experiences, else they necessarily 

 remain unintelligible. The condition of 

 experience thus interpreted by the self to 

 the self is what contemporary pedagogics 

 terms appercept, the basis of all clear, de- 

 finite, positive knowledge. 



I have thus briefly outlined the first 

 stages in intellectual activity to get more 

 clearly before this body the reason for my 

 position in my first contention which is : 



Contention 1. Tliat the study of biology is 

 preeminently adapted to awaken those psychoses 

 — forms of sold- activity — which prepare for the 

 demands of practical life. 



I am not prepared to admit that content 



of mind is secondary in soul development. 

 I am aware that we recall individual and 

 exceptional cases where we have been ac- 

 customed to concede great learning with 

 little ability for application ; but I am led 

 to raise two questions at the very begin- 

 ning of the inquiry : 1st. In these cases 

 has the existence of apperceptive scholar- 

 ship been definitely established? 2d. If 

 this be conceded, has it been shown that 

 under proper stimuli there is the claimed 

 lamentable weakness ? I am not contend- 

 ing for restricted specialization, but I do 

 hold that the ignoring of the value of mind 

 content has been and still is a lamentable 

 weakness in the school curriculum. Let 

 me again recur to the primary law of 

 knowledge development, viz : that percepts 

 must be related and interrelated before 

 definite meaning or knowledge can be predi- 

 cated. The failure to insist upon clear, 

 verifiable forms is a prolific source of su- 

 perficiality and of baneful habit. Some- 

 thing more than effort is needed. I can- 

 not concur with the traditional dogma that 

 the educative value of a process inheres in 

 the effort. Nerve tracts are not trained 

 to definite and specific response by ill- 

 directed conditions. Meaning cannot be 

 put into new forms from vague percepts. 

 The character of the form acquired is too 

 important to be ignored or even to be rele- 

 gated to a secondary position. 



It seems to me, sir, that a radical defect 

 in educational theory has grown out of a 

 misconception of the nature of so-called 

 mental power. It is a matter of grave mo- 

 ment what is studied, what is known ; and 

 it is of far greater importance to heed well 

 the habits formed and the tastes induced. 

 The failure of men who address themselves to 

 the various avocations in life; the number- 

 less wrecks occasioned by futile attempts to 

 occupy positions for which neither heredity 

 nor education has prepared ought to be suffi- 

 cient demonstration of the fallacy of the ' ef- 



