66 THE CONDOR Vol. IX 



If my purpose in starting off with this sweep is not obvious I will make it so. 

 However little or much I may say to you tonight or ever, I would leave no doubt in 

 your minds that I stand for the essential unity of all truth, for the worth-whileness 

 and dignit>' of all real knowledge, for the fundamental interdependence and mutual 

 concern of all sincere endeavor in whatever domain of learning. "Fine, even grand 

 as sentiment," is likely to be exclaimed by almost any man of science however 

 close-shopped a specialist he may be. I would convince you, if perchance some 

 among you are unconvinced, that not only is this gocd as sentiment, but that it is 

 good and, in the long run, inevitable in practice as well. 



From now on we will stick to our text — the worth of ornithology to problems 

 of Evolution. That American Ornithology has reached a higher development than 

 any other department of svstematic natural history appears to be prett}' generally 

 admitted among biologists, at least of our own country. I suppose that in some 

 groups of plants and animals, the classification is as refined in certain particulars as 

 is that of birds. But for balanced accuracy in the taxonomy and out-of-door knowl- 

 edge of a whole class, few would question ornithology's claim to first rank. What 

 does this mean from the standpoint of evolutionary research? 



Experimentation in the laboratory sense is held by many to be the king-pin of 

 today's biology. Fullness and accuracy in data gathering, criticalness in the use of 

 terms, and rigor in the testing of guesses and theories is a truer characterization of 

 the scientific spirit of the time. It is not so much the "statistical method" as the 

 mathematical habit that has spread over our science. Not statistics but mathe- 

 matics in whatever way it can get hold is to be the watchword from now on. This 

 imperial .science is bound to reign in biology as it does everywhere else. 



"Only in experience is truth," said the greatest of modern philosophers. It 

 is hard for biology, especially evolutionary biology, to take this dictum seriou.sly to 

 heart. But it must. Comprehension of problems and attitudes of mind rather than 

 tools are what we prize. Thru these we are finding experimentation to be one 

 wholly indispensable tool; but the very discovers of the power of the experimental 

 method in biology is discovery of the limitation of that method. 



So too with the stati.stical method. At the very moment when this proves its 

 indispensability, it proves also its limitations; it proves its impotency except as it 

 works hand in hand with other methods. So it is and always has been and always 

 must be with all particular methods. Comte and his followers made out a hierarchy 

 of the sciences and assigned to each its distinctive method. Comparison, you know, 

 was held to be the characteristic method in biology. 



The story of Eouis Agassiz's criticism of an addre.ss at a scientific meeting- 

 attended by him soon after his arrival in America, that it was "descriptive but not 

 comparative," is familiar. The incident marks the beginning of an era in American 

 science, as earlier the comparative method in the hands of Eamarck, Cuvier, Goethe, 

 the Milne-Edwards and others, had made an era in European science. The achieve- 

 ments reached thru comparison as the guiding light, stand forth too magnificently 

 in the history of the last century's progress in biolog}^ to permit cavil as to its effi- 

 cacy as an instrument. But powerful as it is, who today would think of attributing 

 to it all power? It, too, proved its limitations in proving its indispensabilit\'. 



But while instruments sooner or later reveal their limitations and hence their 

 necessity of being coupled with other instruments, the}^ also prove their dependence 

 on skill and accuracy in handling. Many methods well used is the da}' 's demand. 

 Against this no caveat worth heeding can be filed. Observations have to be made; 

 descriptions have to be written; nomenclatures have to be applied; measurements 

 and enumerations have to be taken; experiments have to be performed; and all must 



