494 READINGS IN EVOLUTION, GENETICS, AND EUGENICS 
in the interests of race betterment. In so far, then, as the infant 
mortality movement is not futile it is, from a strict biological view- 
point, often detrimental to the future of the race. 
Do we then discourage all attempts to save the babies? Do we 
leave them all to natural selection? Do we adopt the “better dead”’ 
gospel ? 
Unqualifiedly, no! The sacrifice of the finer human feelings, 
which would accompany any such course, would be a greater loss to 
the race than is the eugenic loss from the perpetuation of weak strains 
of heredity. The abolition of altruistic and humanitarian sentiment 
for the purpose of race betterment would ultimately defeat its own end 
by making race betterment impossible. 
But race betterment will also be impossible unless a clear distinc- 
tion is made between measures that really mean race betterment of a 
fundamental and permanent nature, and measures which do not. 
We have chosen the Infant Mortality Movement for analysis in this 
chapter because it is an excellent example of the kind of social better- 
ment which is taken for granted, by most of its proponents, to be a 
fundamental piece of race betterment; but which, as a fact, often 
means race impairment. No matter how abundant and urgent are 
the reasons for continuing to reduce infant mortality wherever pos- 
sible, it is dangerous to close the eyes to the fact that the gain from it 
is of a kind that must be paid for in other ways; that to carry on the 
movement without adding eugenics to it will be a short-sighted policy, 
which increases the present happiness of the world at the cost of 
diminishing the happiness of posterity through the perpetuation of 
inferior strains. 
While some euthenic measures are eugenically evils, even if 
necessary ones, it must not be inferred that all euthenic measures are 
dysgenic. Many of them, such as the economic and social changes we 
have suggested in earlier chapters, are an important part of eugenics. 
Every euthenic measure should be scrutinized from the evolutionary 
standpoint; if it is eugenic as well as euthenic, it should be whole- 
heartedly favored; if it is dysgenic but euthenic it should be con- 
demned or adopted, according to whether or not the gain in all ways 
from its operation will exceed the damage. 
In general, euthenics, when not accompanied by some form of 
selection (i.e., eugenics) ultimately defeats its ownend. If itis accom- 
panied by rational selection, it can usually be indorsed. Eugenics, 
