^iffl'mF*'}         lhe  Teaching  of  Physiology.  323 
doubted  whether  any  preparation  for  a  medical  career  is  better  than 
that  afforded  by  a  physiological  laboratory.  There  are,  of  course, 
many  physicians  of  the  highest  rank  who  have  not  enjoyed  the 
advantages  of  a  laboratory  training,  but  they  will,  I  think,  all  be 
found  to  have  habits  of  accurate  observation  and  careful  reasoning, 
mental  qualities  which  it  is  the  special  function  of  the  laboratory  to 
foster  and  cultivate. 
Having  thus  borne  testimony  to  the  value  of  the  laboratory 
method,  let  me  ask  you  to  consider  the  limits,  if  any  there  are,  to 
the  application  of  this  form  of  instruction. 
The  most  superficial  examination  of  the  question  makes  it  clear 
that  laboratory  methods  are  extremely  costly  both  in  time  and 
money,  and  that  there  are,  in  all  the  medical  sciences,  many  subjects 
which  cannot  well  be  taught  in  this  way. 
It  is  thus  evident  that  a  considerable  portion  of  the  instruction 
in  physiology  must  be  given  by  didactic  methods,  simply  because 
this  is  the  only  practicable  way  of  imparting  necessary  information. 
The  ignorance  of  a  young  practitioner  called  to  his  first  case  of 
diabetes  would  scarcely  be  excused  on  the  ground  that  he  was 
"  trained  for  power,"  and  that  there  were  no  experiments  on  glyco- 
genesis  in  his  laboratory  course  in  physiology. 
In  this  connection  it  will  be  well  to  inquire  how  far  didactic 
methods  of  instruction  afford  opportunities  for  mental  training,  and 
here  I  shall  be  compelled,  I  fear,  to  take  issue  with  those  of  my 
professional  brethren  who  regard  text-books  and  lecture-room  in- 
struction as  essentially  lifeless  in  their  character.  It  seems  to  me, 
on  the  contrary,  that  the  best  lecturing  is  often  the  source  of  a  dis- 
tinct mental  stimulus,  for,  as  Dr.  Mitchell  has  well  said,  it  "  does  not 
so  much  think  for  you  as  invite  you  to  think  along  suggested  lines 
of  inquiry." 
In  every  department  of  medicine  advanced  instruction  necessarily 
deals  with  subjects  which  lie  within  what  Foster  has  called  the 
"  penumbra  "  of  solid  scientific  acquisition,  and  about  which  conflict- 
ing views  are  therefore  certain  to  be  held.  It  is  in  inviting  thought 
with  regard  to  the  evidence  an  experienced  lecturer  has  his  best 
opportunity  to  train  the  minds  of  his  hearers.  Other  opportunities 
are  also  afforded  by  the  historical  presentation  of  subjects,  about 
which  differences  of  opinion  no  longer  exist,  for  there  are  few  things 
more  instructive  than  to  follow  up  step  by  step  the  lines  by  which 
