66 Proceedings of the Royal Physical Society. 
time of war it is infinitely greater. Regard for a moment the influence 
exerted by the wireless form of telegraphy on 
‘‘This precious stone set in a silver sea, 
Which serves it in the office of a wall,” 
and something of the power of applied science, the offspring of pure science, 
becomes apparent. No text could better serve for a thesis on the small and 
neglected scientific beginnings of great things. 
Search for the reason for resistance to new ideas and new speculations is 
not without interest to the biologist and sociologist. The first reason which 
suggests itself is that matter-of-fact, rule-of-thumb people are always in the 
majority, and, therefore, anything out of the ordinary is bound to meet with © 
Opposition in excess of approval. Or we might agree with George Eliot in 
saying that the practical mind and the narrow imagination go together, and 
with H. G. Wells in asserting that few have been accustomed to respond to 
the call of a creative imagination. There are few—and these not men of 
action—who are capable of looking forward into the future. We might also 
point to the fact that the pursuit of knowledge does not follow a straight line. 
It zig-zags hither and thither, frequently halts, and indeed often has to hark 
back. Such erratic progress cannot make a very urgent appeal to the 
practical mind. 
But these explanations are probably not entirely just to that necessary 
member of the community, the “practical man.” It must always be 
remembered that only those of the future shall see the present—see it 
steadily and see it whole. The ultimate goal of a scientific discovery is 
hidden from those who were present at its birth. Moreover, a truth new- 
wrested from nature seldom carries with it an indication of future possibilities. 
In most cases, and especially if it is a germinal truth, it possesses few 
attractive features to the eye of him who seeks for signs of future utility. 
“Truth new-born looks a mis-shapen and untimely birth.” 
In all probability what the sociologist has come to call the “Herd 
Instinct” is an important factor in producing resistance to the reception of 
the new and unusual. The “Herd Instinct” may be briefly explained as 
follows :—Man being a gregarious animal and leading the communal life, it 
is essential that his actions should be co-operative. The homogeneity 
necessary for co-operative action results from an inherent impulse on the 
part of each individual to think and act in conformity with the thought and 
action of his fellows. There seems good reason for concluding that homogeneity 
is the result of natural selection. There appears to have been an accumula- 
tion of experiences which, unconsciously so far as the individual is concerned, 
