but slight and ineffectual; a smattering of Greek and Latin and other ornamental things, of little use for anyone whose object is to get at truth, and to be a practical man. So, too, M. Renan talks of the "superficial humanism" of a schoolcourse which treats us as if we were all going to be poets, writers, preachers, orators, and he opposes this humanism to positive science, or the critical search after truth. And there is always a tendency in those who are remonstrating against the predominance of letters in education, to understand by letters belles lettres, and by belles lettres a superficial humanism, the opposite of science or true knowledge.

But when we talk of knowing Greek and Roman antiquity, for instance, which is the knowledge 'people have called the humanities, I for my part mean a knowledge which is something more than a superficial humanism, mainly decorative. "I call all teaching scientific," said Wolf, the critic of Homer, "which is systematically laid out and followed up to its original sources. For example: a knowledge of classical antiquity is scientific when the remains of classical antiquity are correctly studied in the original languages." There can be no doubt that Wolf is perfectly right; that all learning is scientific which is systematically laid out and followed up to its original sources, and that a genuine humanism is scientific.

When I speak of knowing Greek and Roman antiquity, therefore, as a help to knowing ourselves and the world, I mean more than a knowledge of so much vocabulary, so much grammar, so many portions of authors in the Greek and Latin languages; I mean knowing the Greeks and Romans, and their life and genius, and what they were and did in the world; what we get from them, and what is its value. That, at least, is the ideal; and when we talk of endeavouring to know Greek and Roman antiquity, as a help to know

ing ourselves and the world, we mean endeavouring so to know them as to satisfy this ideal, however much we may still fall short of it.

From "Literature and Science" in Discourses in America.

THOMAS HENRY HUXLEY (1825-1895)

S Arnold was the defender of a cultural education, so

A Huxley was the advocate of a scientific education. be Α

He

lieved that such a training would best fit a man to play his part in the complex business world of modern life. Huxley became the leader of the scientists in the view of the general public because he was able to express his ideas in a clearer and more readable form than most of the others.

Huxley found that the practical business men were also opposed to a scientific education. The teaching of the new science seemed to them too speculative and appeared to lead to conclusions too radical to be practical. It was as though the established order was to be overturned. They looked with some concern on the establishment of workingmen's colleges and the education of their employees. If these movements flourished, would not labor soon displace capital in prominence? Business men believed that education, scientific or cultural, would make the masses dissatisfied and cause labor disturbances.

Huxley came forth as the champion of the new science, especially Darwinism, and entered the controversy with a firm determination to prove the validity of the position of the scientists. As much of his writing was controversial, it has lost its interest. But his message to the business man is still significant. With all the acumen derived from a training in medicine and natural science he pointed out to them that education would make the workers more efficient instead of less manageable. The more they learned about the processes of natural law, the greater would be their conviction that intelligent direction of labor was necessary. It is hardly overstating the matter to say that Huxley was a prime mover in awakening the business man to a realization of the value of theoretical knowledge, which has resulted in the firms of the present day requiring their employees to attend evening classes and to study for advancement.

ATTITUDE OF THE BUSINESS MAN TO

SCIENTIFIC EDUCATION

From the time that the first suggestion to introduce physical science into ordinary education was timidly whispered, until now, the advocates of scientific education have met with opposition of two kinds. On the one hand, they have been pooh-poohed by the men of business who pride themselves on being the representatives of practicality; while, on the other hand, they have been excommunicated by the classical scholars, in their capacity of Levites in charge of the ark of culture and monopolists of liberal education.

The practical men believed that the idol whom they worship-rule of thumb-has been the source of the past prosperity, and will suffice for the future welfare of the arts and manufactures. They were of opinion that science is speculative rubbish; that theory and practice have nothing to do with one another; and that the scientific habit of mind is an impediment, rather than an aid, in the conduct of ordinary affairs.

I have used the past tense in speaking of the practical men-for although they were very formidable thirty years ago, I am not sure that the pure species has not been extirpated. In fact, so far as mere argument goes, they have been subjected to such a feu d'enfer that it is a miracle if any have escaped. But I have remarked that your typical practical man has an unexpected resemblance to one of Milton's angels. His spiritual wounds, such as are inflicted by logical weapons, may be as deep as a well and as wide as a church door, but beyond shedding a few drops of ichor, celestial or otherwise, he is no whit the worse. So, if any of these opponents be left, I will not waste time in vain repetition of the demonstrative evidence of the practical value

of science; but knowing that a parable will sometimes penetrate where syllogisms fail to effect an entrance, I will offier a story for their consideration.

Once upon a time, a boy,2 with nothing to depend upon but his own vigorous nature, was thrown into the thick of the struggle for existence in the midst of a great manufacturing population. He seems to have had a hard fight, inasmuch as, by the time he was thirty years of age, his total disposable funds amounted to twenty pounds. Nevertheless, middle life found him giving proof of his comprehension of the practical problems he had been roughly called upon to solve, by a career of remarkable prosperity.

Finally, having reached old age with its well-earned surroundings of "honour, troops of friends," the hero of my story bethought himself of those who were making a like start in life, and how he could stretch out a helping hand to them.

.After long and anxious reflection this successful practical man of business could devise nothing better than to provide them with the means of obtaining "sound, extensive, and practical scientific knowledge." And he devoted a large part of his wealth and five years of incessant work to this end.

I need not point the moral of a tale which, as the solid and spacious fabric of the Scientific College assures us, is no fable, nor can anything which I could say intensify the force of this practical answer to practical objections.

From Science and Culture.

THE VALUE OF SCIENTIFIC EDUCATION

But I am not sure that at this point the "practical" man, scotched but not slain, may ask what all this talk about culture has to do with an Institution, the object of which

3