Culture and Science. ' T 
rate. And here, I confess, I part company with the friends of 
physical science, with whom up to this point I have been agreeing. 
In differing from them, however, I wish to proceed with the utmost 
caution and diffidence. The smallness of my acquaintance with the 
disciplines of natural science is ever before my mind, and I am fear- 
ful of doing them injustice. The ability of the partisans of natural 
science makes them formidable persons to contradict. The tone of 
tentative inquiry, which befits a being of dim faculties and bounded 
knowledge, is the tone I would wish to take and not to depart from. 
At present it seems to me, that those who are for giving to natural 
knowledge, as they call it, the chief place in the education of the 
majority of mankind, leave one important thing out of their account 
—the constitution of human nature.” 
That important element to the constitution of human nature, we 
elsewhere learn. A knowledge of all nature (and man is a part) 
is the domain of Science, but still, we are told, “it will be knowl- 
edge only which they give us; knowledge not put up for us into 
relation with our sense for conduct, our sense for beauty, and touched 
With emotion by being so put; not thus put for us, and therefore, 
to the majority of mankind, after a certain while unsatisfying, 
wearying,” ; 
I cannot forbear, in this connection, to once more cite Mr. Arnold. 
In his Cambridge address he recalled to his auditors a certain 
utterance of his of the past. 
s Some of you,” he said, “ may have met with a phrase of mine 
which has been the object of afgood deal of comment; an observa- 
tion to the effect that in our culture, the aim being to know our- 
selves and the world, we have, as the means to this end, to know 
the best which has been thought and said in the world.” 
But to know only the best, however desirable—and it is super- 
eminently so—is only to very imperfectly know the world and 
human nature. And the experience of many in this audience will 
attest to the fact that idiosyncracies are only partially controlled by 
poate. Many classical students,—many who have passed with 
yee a of our colleges after having pursued the entire curriculum 
yi e umanities—have shown a lack of morality and integrity all 
e more glaring because of their culture, and I doubt not that 
ee as you may recall those whose scholastic training has been 
ut yet who have ended their career in a prison cell. Some of _ 
ose who have thus lapsed have done so in consequence of the inapt- 
hess of their furniture for the struggle of life. There are those of 
