388 Ethical Functions of Scientific Study — Chamherlin. 
investigative study may be, the ignorant criminal classes are 
the most remote from its influence and the last to be reached by 
it. Law and public opinion must be chiefly relied upon to re- 
strain these gross and criminal expressions of immorality. 
Law and public opinion work at this lower end of the ethical 
series, while intellectual and ethical education work at the upper 
and initial end. Law and public opinion attack immorality in 
its results; intellectual and ethical education attack it in its 
sources. Law and public opinion deal with immorality in its 
last stages when it has developed itself into tangible acts. In- 
tellectual and ethical training deal with it in its origin, in its in- 
itial possibilities; indeed they deal with potential immorality 
before it becomes immoral. Law and public opinion are restrict- 
tive, repressive, remedial. Ethically intellectual education 
is anticipatory and preventive. Law and public opinion, dealing 
with the tangible and demonstrative, are tangible and demon- 
strative in their effects, and hence have largely engrossed the 
attention of moralists and philanthropists . Ethically intellec- 
tual training, dealing with potential immoralities before they 
become actual immoralities, is intangible and undemonstrative 
in its effects, and has failed to command the full recognition 
which it merits. 
These contrasted methods of attack are well illustrated in a 
prevalent evil which is being rapidly undermined by the spread 
of the spirit of creative scholarship. I refer to pugilism, physi- 
cal and intellectual. There is a physical pugilism and there is 
an intellectual pugilism, with all gradations between. Law and 
public opinion have attacked effectively its grosser tangible ex- 
pressions, but have scarcely reached beyond its physical aspects. 
From a primitive state in which no restrictions whatever were 
placed upon personal encounter, with or without weapons, pub- 
lic opinion, followed by law, gradually imposed restrictions until 
encounter with weapons came to be a crime and, at length, en- 
counter without weapons, a misdemeanor. They have thus 
covered the field of the more physical and tangible. They have 
even advanced an important step further and forbidden personal 
attack in speech and in print of certain kinds and degrees. 
But though law and public opinion have entered upon this great 
field they have scarcely made themselves felt in it, and there 
remains a marked contrast between the prevalence of physical 
