The Sciences Of Man In The Making

AN ORIENTATION BOOK

Edwin A. Kirkpatrick

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2013
• ISBN:
  9781136324321
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Medicina
• Subtopic: Atención sanitaria

This is Volume XVII of thirty-eight in collection on General Psychology. Originally published in 1932, this is an orientation text on the sciences of man in the making and looks at man as an inhabitant of the earth, how life is preserved, varieties of the human species, avoiding waste and the behaviour of man amongst more.

THE SCIENCES OF MAN IN THE MAKING

CHAPTER 1

NATURE AND METHODS OF SCIENCE

VARIETIES OF KNOWLEDGE

IF you drop the penny you hold into the water it will sink, but if you drop a chip in, it will float. If you keep that cat under water he will drown, but if you keep this fish out of water he will die. Almost any child of school age knows these facts, but is such knowledge scientific ?

The first essential of scientific knowledge is that it shall be classified in such a way that an assertion may be made of all members of a group instead of one or two. When a child can think in general terms that all objects made of metal will sink in water, and all wooden objects will float, his knowledge is becoming scientific in an elementary way. In proportion as such knowledge becomes accurate, does its scientific character increase. All objects heavier than water sink, while those lighter than water float, is more accurate as well as more general than the preceding assertion.

The statement is not accurate, however, unless we add that in order that objects heavier than water shall sink, their shape must be such that the amount of water displaced weighs less than the object. If this were not the case steel ships would not float.

A moment’s thought will show that the above general statements imply measurements of size and weight. This is one of the essentials of accurate scientific knowledge. The primitive mode of thinking which classifies as heavy or light, old or young, living or dead, intelligent or stupid, good or bad, etc., is being changed into quantitative statements, such as—the object is lighter or heavier than an equal bulk of water at the same temperature ; or still more definitely, its specific gravity is .97 or 1.31. In age the person or animal is so many tenths as old in years as the average age attained by members of the species in the same environment ; or the bony structure of the wrist is 89 per cent, of the size of that of the average adult, or contains 91 per cent, as much mineral matter. This animal is dead in the sense that the vital organs, heart and lungs, are 100 per cent, non-functioning ; but 98 per cent, of the cells of which the body is composed are still alive. This man is good because he did right 99 times in a hundred when there were chances to be dishonest in a certain way, whereas the average for hiâ companions is 71.

From these examples we see that the more scientifically accurate knowledge becomes, the more must its truths be expressed in mathematical terms. Mathematics uses the most accurate of language symbols, hence mathematical terms are generally employed to express truth with exactness. The statement that all men are born with two legs and all horses with four, is practically correct and reasonably scientific, yet not absolutely accurate since a fractional per cent, are born with a different number. The per cents, having an unusual number of ribs, vertebrae or teeth are considerably greater. To be accurate, classes must be so definite in the characteristics implied that the assertions of what is true of members of the class must hold for all but a negligibly small number of individuals, or there must be a numerical statement of the per cent, of cases in which any given statement holds true ; e.g. All full-blooded negroes are musical, or of a thousand full-blooded negroes between six and sixteen years of age tested, only one was tone deaf in the sense of being unable to distinguish between notes c and d.

No sharp line can be drawn between scientific and unscientific knowledge, but it is clear that the percentage of truths in our text-books which can be expressed in mathematical terms is much higher in physics and chemistry, than in botany or zoology, and very much higher than in economics or history, while those that can be so expressed in literature and other arts are few or unimportant.

Knowledge may, however, be of great value when it is not possible to express it with a definiteness which would justify its being called scientific. The knowledge of harmony gained by an experienced painter or musician may be of far greater value for artistic purposes than the more scientific formulations of physicists and psychologists as to what wave-lengths of light or sound correspond to the various colours and pitches perceived by means of the eye and the ear. In general, knowledge that is of practical and artistic value is likely to be gained regarding all sorts of things and situations before any knowledge worthy of the name scientific has been formulated. Not until scientific knowledge of common objects and situations has become extensive and definite does it correct, supplement and largely displace the less accurate knowledge gained by incidental experience in industry and art. Only within the last century has scientific knowledge come to play a large part in manufacturing, mining and agriculture ; and still more recently in the promotion of social welfare and the reproduction of things artistic.

Science is concerned not only with accurate definitions and classifications but with sequences. It assumes that objects and events are related to each other in such a way that when the combinations are the same the same results will follow as in previous cases. It is the problem of science to determine what things are of the same type, and all the conditions involved in the sequences of events. The solution of its problems is chiefly a matter of the accurate use of methods of checking the similarity and identity of objects, conditions and events by observation and experiment.

SCIENTIFIC KNOWLEDGE NOT ABSOLUTE AND UNCHANGEABLE

Science makes no attempt to gain absolute knowledge but only to discover relations between experiences. If no serious mistake has been made in the facts classified and their relations to each other, the supposed truths of science are never entirely contradicted, but the facts are always subject to more accurate determination, making possible more exact classifications or numerical statements, and simpler formulation. Every new discovery prepares the way for such further advances.

Incidental to this normal progress in knowledge, there are changes produced by examining new facts and by new theories as to general relations which may seem simpler and more satisfactory to the human mind. Extensive observation in the early history of the West and South made it certain that people living in the lowlands were afflicted with malaria more than those inhabiting the uplands. This knowledge was sufficiently general to be classed as rudimentarily scientific. The theory that the disease was caused by the moist “ malarial air ” seemed to fit the facts, and was in accord with other beliefs as to the part played by air in the production of diseases. Later investigations have proved that germs are the cause of many diseases, and that they are usually passed from one animal or person to another, not by means of the air but by contact. It has been demonstrated that the germs of malaria are carried from one person to another by mosquitoes. This seems quite contradictory to the original “ scientific ” truth. Yet the original generalization that malaria is more prevalent in the wet lowlands (unchanged by man) is as true as ever. The relation of these facts, however, is now seen differently, and explained by another and largely contradictory theory. It is not the moist air, but the little pools where mosquitoes breed, that is the significant connection of the disease with the lowlands. The disease is transmitted, not by breathing malarial air, but by the bite of a mosquito which has previously bitten a diseased individual.

The theory, now so generally accepted, that malaria and many other diseases are produced by microbes, may conceivably be replaced sometime by the view that in many cases the germs are not the cause of the disease, but the results or accompaniments of it. The scientific truth would then be differently formulated, yet the essential truth of the usual close relation between many diseases and germs, would not be contradicted.

Whenever anyone asserts that a truth of the relation of certain kinds of facts to other facts is absolutely and unchangeably true, he is making a rash statement never justified by the canons of science. All that a scientist can consistently say is, that in the light of known facts and general truths, a given statement is scientifically justified. With more accurate observations and measurements and with the study of hitherto unobserved facts, the truth is likely to need restatement. Science simply uses the best-known methods of studying causes, conditions and results, and of formulating truths and verifying them by further observation and experiment.

In a deductive and logical science like mathematics, certain definitions are given and assumptions made, and from these truths may be formulated that never change, e.g. “ the whole is equal to the sum of its parts ” and “ things equal to the same thing are equal to each other.” These will always be true when space, time and number are conceived in the same way ; but in the objective world with which science deals, these truths hold only to a limited extent. The sum of the bricks of which a house is composed is not the same as the pile of bricks from which it is made ; nor is a house the same as another composed of an equal number of bricks.

Given certain assumptions, mathematical and philosophical truths may be logically educed ; but the way in which things behave can never be discovered by such means. Water and many other substances contract when cooled, and logically should continue to grow smaller with increased cold, but observation and measurement show that after a certain temperature is reached, water stops contracting and expands as its temperature falls, and then changes into the form of solid ice. We cannot tell by mere logical thinking how objects will act under new conditions, but they must be observed in order to find out. Not only this, but any truth formulated is based upon observations made, and care must be exercised in formulating what will be true in future experiences. Under certain conditions water remains a fluid, and one noting the fact without considering the conditions would naturally and logically say that water always remains a fluid ; but when conditions are taken into account it is discovered that water may become either solid or gaseous according to temperature conditions. This indicates the limits of inductive science. It must be based upon a sufficient number of known facts, but is always subject to change when new or more accurately measured facts are acquired. The fundamental assumption of science is that we can judge of the unexamined and of future events, only by extensive study of similar things under similar conditions. Any object such as iron will always have the same essential characteristics that have been observed under ordinary conditions of temperature, etc., but what characteristics it will show when the temperature is absolute zero or at a million degrees of heat, cannot be known with certainty in advance of studying it at these temperatures.

Predictions as to the behaviour of plants, animals or human beings under conditions never observed are even less probable. Experiments on guinea-pigs and rats may make predictions as to the effects of chemicals or disease germs upon them quite certain, and may justify the theory that the effects will be of the same nature upon all animals, including man ; but the latter proposition can be considered as established scientific truth only when a number of tests with various animals, including man, have verified it. The greater the variety of facts, rather than the numbers of the same kind, confirms a theory.

Apparently well-established theories sometimes give place to others which prove to be in accord with a larger variety of facts. By studying old phenomena more carefully or by examining new, reasons for changing old theories are often found. Of two theories confirmed by facts, the simplest one is usually accepted as the best. The careful scientist is therefore cautious about making assertions about what will be found in unexplored fields, yet he is always constructing theories that he regards as likely to be verified by future studies. There are all gradations between probable hypotheses and theories, and those so well established that change is improbable.

PURE AND APPLIED SCIENCES

While there is no sharp line of division between knowledge that is scientific and general truths based on experiences gained in securing the means of livelihood and comfort, yet most scientific knowledge is the result of curiosity regarding the world in which we live. Anyone who observes the stars, weather, plants, animals and people, notes similarities that serve as a basis of classification, and formulates general truths as to what may be expected of members of each class, is developing scientific knowledge. Those who make progress are likely to be raising questions as to what may be true, and then observing to see if what they thought probably true is verified. In other words, they form crude theories and then observe—not just anything—but whatever bears upon the truth of their hypotheses. If this is done in order to produce a better kind of axe or canoe, a better method of raising corn or of hardening steel, the knowledge gained is of the practical type. Such knowledge is usually limited in range and application.

In the pursuit of pure science, the essential characteristics of all cutting tools, of all floating crafts, of all animal and plant life, are studied and the classifications made in accordance with similarities, regardless of any practical purposes to be achieved. Truths as to the relationship of one set of facts to other classes are sought, regardless of whether there is any known use for such knowledge. The botanist is just as interested in studying and classifying weeds as useful grains, vegetables and fruits ; and as much concerned with conditions affecting the growth of “ pussley ” as of peas. Such studies are known as pure science, as distinguished from applied science.

Pure science is regarded as superior to applied science by some because it is the product of the desire to know and understand regardless of any immediate practical end to be gained. Others regard it as superior because its truths are broader and less likely to be changed by further research, and because fundamental truths are sure sooner or later to be permanently useful in gaining all sorts of desirable ends. All knowledge of plants and the conditions under which they thrive are useful in agriculture, helping in the effort to grow better crops and in the eradication of weeds. Nothing seemed more useless than a knowledge of X-rays when they were first discovered. Now such knowledge is indispensable, not only in medical practice but in many industries where there is need to know the internal structure of things. The knowledge of electricity gained in part through the curiosity of Franklin has been extended until it is now used in every home and factory, and in every phase of our modern life.

Pure science is usually surer than the narrow and immediately useful truths of applied science because of a very fundamental human characteristic. What one sees and accepts as true is determined to a very great extent by what one expects and desires. Where the truth sought has immediate bearing on any subject in which there is any emotional interest, the facts noted and their interpretation so affect the mind that often the whole truth is not obtained. At the present time it is almost impossible to get scientific knowledge of the effects of prohibition, because every one supplying data, and nearly every investigator has his facts selected, coloured and interpreted by his prejudices.

The wish that anything may be true, powerfully influences the mind toward finding it true. A researcher in pure science is usually far less influenced by prejudices and wishes than is the investigator who is aware of the practical results of his findings. Even the pure scientist is, however, likely to be prejudiced i...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Halftitle
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Preface
• Contents
• CHAPTER I NATURE AND METHODS OF SCIENCE
• CHAPTER II MAN AS AN INHABITANT OF THE EARTH
• CHAPTER III VARIETIES OF HUMAN SPECIES AND THEIR MODES OF LIVING, OR ANTHROPOLOGY AND ETHNOLOGY
• CHAPTER IV HOW LIFE IS PRESERVED, OR PHYSIOLOGY AND HYGIENE
• CHAPTER V IMPROVING THE HUMAN SPECIES, OR EUGENICS AND EUTHENICS
• CHAPTER VI AVOIDING WASTE, OR ECONOMICS
• CHAPTER VII MEANS OF CONTROL, OR POLITICAL SCIENCE
• CHAPTER VIII HOW MAN BEHAVES, OR GENERAL PSYCHOLOGY
• CHAPTER IX PERSONALITY DIFFERENCES, OR INDIVIDUAL PSYCHOLOGY
• CHAPTER X BEHAVIOUR IN RELATION TO OTHERS, OR SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY
• CHAPTER XI ORGANIZED GROUP LIVING, OR SOCIOLOGY
• CHAPTER XII CHANGING HUMAN BEINGS, OR EDUCATION
• CHAPTER XIII MAN AND THE UNSEEN WORLD, OR RELIGION
• CHAPTER XIV REGULATION OF HUMAN INTERACTION, OR MORALS
• CHAPTER XV MAN, THE MASTER OF LIFE, DEVELOPING A SCIENCE OF ETHICAL LIVING
• NOTES
• INDEX