A Monthly Journal, established in 1867, Devoted to the Advancement of the Biological Sciences with Special Reference to the Factors of Organic Evolution and Heredity CONTENTS OF THE OCTOBER NUMBER The Non-muscular Articulations of Crinoids. AUSTIN HOBART CLARK. On Some Dinichthyid Armor Plates from the Marcellus Shale. BURNETT SMITH. Are Species Realities or Concepts only. Professor J. H. POWERS. Shorter Articles and Discussion: A Light Weight, Port able Outfit for the Study and Transportation of Ants. EDITH N. BUCKINGHAM, Comparison of Canolestes with Polyprotodonta and Diprotodonta. PAULINE H. DEDERER. Notes and Literature: Comparative Psycholoy - Bohn's "The Birth of Intelligence": Professor H. S. JENNINGS. Mammalogy-Osgood's Revision of the Mice of the Genus Peromyscus, Dr. J. A. ALLEN, LEO ERRARA, Professor CHARLES E. BESSEY. CONTENTS OF THE NOVEMBER NUMBER The American Toad (Bufo lentiginosus americanus LeConte). NEWTON MILLER. Notes on the Behavior of the Domestic Fowl. PHILIP B. HADLEY. Vitality of Pine Seeds and the Delayed Opening of Cones. Professor W. C. COKER. The Affinities of the Echinoidea. AUSTIN HOBART CLARK. The Early Breeding Habits of Amblystoma punctatum Notes and Literature: Marine Biology-Papers from the Tortugas Laboratory, Professor WILLIAM E. RITTER. Experimental Evolution - Inheritance of Color in Pigeons, B. B. HORTON. CONTENTS OF THE DECEMBER NUMBER The Cuticula and Subcuticula of the Trematodes and Cestodes. Professor HENRY S. PRATT. The American Toad (Bufo lentiginosus americanus, LeConte). NEWTON MILLER. Observations on Copulation among Crawfishes with Special Reference to Sex Recognition. Dr. A. S. PEARSE Shorter Articles and Correspondence: Degeneration accompanying Inbreeding. Professor C. B. DAVEN PORT. A Note of the Prairie-dog Owl which Resembles the Rattlesnake's Rattle: Dr. J. ARTHUR HARRIS. Notes and Literature: The Causation of Sex, Professor H. E. JORDAN. Index to Volume XLIII, CONTENTS OF THE JANUARY NUMBER The Reappearance in the Offspring of artificially produced Parental Modifications. Dr. FRANCIS B. SUMNER. A Bimodal Variation Polygon in Syndesmon thalictroides and its Morphological Significance. Dr. J. ARTHUR HARRIS. The Miocene Trees of the Rocky Mountains. Professor T. D. A. CoCKERELL. A Suggestion regarding Heavy and Light Seed Grain. L. R. WALDRON. Notes and Literature: Mammalogy-Nelson's Monograph of the North American Leporida, Dr. J. A. ALLEN. Neurology-Edinger's Vorlesungen über den Bau der nervösen Centralorgane, Professor G. H. PARKER. Single Number 35 Cents Yearly Subscription, $4.00 The NATURALIST will be sent to new subscribers for four months for One Dollar THE SCIENCE PRESS Garrison, N. Y. Sub-Station 84: NEW YORK Lancaster, Pa. THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. FEBRUARY, 1910 SCIENTIFIC FAITH AND WORKS1 BY PROFESSOR ARTHUR GORDON WEBSTER CLARK UNIVERSITY THE HE ancient poets, at the beginning of their great epics, invoke the muse, and forthwith proclaim their subjects: .Arma virumque cano, I sing of arms and the man, says Virgil, Myviv deíde Ocá-Achilles' baleful wrath, O Goddess, sing, are the words with which Homer begins the Iliad. A modern poet, full of sympathy with the changed times of to-day, Rudyard Kipling, makes one of his most attractive characters, the old Scotch engineer, exclaim, I'm sick of all their quirks an' turns-the loves an' doves they dreamLord, send a man like Robbie Burns to sing the Song o' Steam! In undertaking to do my part in the dedication of this splendid temple of science, I can but echo McAndrew's prayer, and wish that I had the words of a poet to sing the song of science. For what true devotee of science does not look upon her as a star-eyed goddess, and feel within himself at times feelings akin to those of the poet when breathing the divine afflatus? For the chief characteristic of both the poet and the scientist is the creative spirit, the poet creates beauty, or the appreciation of it, the scientist creates truth, or if he does not create truth, he at least creates the appreciation of it and of its results. I have chosen for my subject "Scientific Faith and Works." According to the Apostle Paul, "faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." In an eloquent panegyric, he recounts to us the deeds of the Hebrew patriarchs, "who by faith subdued kingdoms, wrought righteousness, obtained promises, stopped the mouths of lions, 1 An address delivered at the dedication of the Laboratory of Physics, University of Illinois, November 26, 1909. VOL. LXXVI.-9. quenched the violence of fire, escaped the edge of the sword, out of weakness were made strong, waxed valiant in fight, turned to flight the armies of the aliens." I shall make it my task to show, by a not too literal application of the text, that similar effects may be produced through science. The more practical and prosaic Apostle James, on the other hand, in a chapter somewhat disparaging faith, exalts works, and issues the challenge, "Shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works." It is no doubt easier in the case of science to play the rôle of James than that of Paul. The works of science are abundant, and are appreciated of all. To catalogue them is an easy and somewhat commonplace task. But in order to better appreciate them let us take a brief glance at the world before it was under the influence of science as it is to-day. If we consider the differences between ourselves and the ancients, we are at once struck by the fact that the chief dissimilarity is that they had little or nothing that can properly be called science. Deep thinkers they had, poets that have never been surpassed for lofty imagination and noble diction, teachers who devoted their lives to the attempt to solve the mysteries of existence, but the systematic study of the workings of nature is essentially modern. The great Hebrew nation, to whom we are indebted for so much that is fundamental in our religion and morals, brought the laws of conduct and the purity of life to an extent never equalled by the other nations of antiquity. Being essentially a race of simple shepherds and agriculturists, although in close contact with nature they produced no art, graphic or architectural, and left no engineering works to arouse our admiration for their resourcefulness. The sacred writings of the Hebrews are full of allusions to nature, in both its kind and terrible aspects. "Canst thou bind the sweet influences of the Pleiades? or loose the bands of Orion? Hast thou an arm like God? or canst thou thunder with a voice like him? Deep calleth unto deep at the noise of thy waterspouts: all thy waves and thy billows are gone over me. The heavens declare the glory of God, and the firmament sheweth his handiwork." These are specimens of the Hebrews' attitude toward nature, one of deep awe and reverence for its mighty Creator rather than of admiration for nature itself. The idea of studying into the workings of nature would, no doubt, have seemed preposterous and irreverent to such minds. The bow in the cloud was naturally accepted as a pledge made by God to men, while its circular form and unvarying arrangement of colors led to no curiosity to know why. The Egyptians, who so long were masters of the Hebrews, surpassed them in their interference with nature, and carried on engineering operations on an extensive scale, though of a simple character. They devised simple engines for raising the water of the Nile, and developed great irrigation systems, while the pyramids still If we may believe all that remain a source of wonder to moderns. students of the pyramids tell us, the Egyptians had no mean knowledge of astronomy as well. Certain it is that the Assyrians had a knowledge not only of astronomy, but of mathematics, having highly developed systems of numeration and methods of calculation, their sexagesimal system of numeration having come down to us in the division of the circle into three hundred and sixty degrees, against which anachronism the decimal system is but now beginning to struggle. The engineering operations of the Egyptians, however, were of a very simple sort, and their construction of the pyramids was probably permitted rather by the unlimited supply of forced labor than by the employment of devices for taking advantage of anything but brute force. As the Hebrews were specialists in morals, so the Greeks were specialists in beauty, and pushed its culture to a degree never before or since attained. Had the Greeks left to us no masterpieces of literature, we should forever remember them by their magnificent temples, their incomparable sculpture, and their beautiful vases. Such a people must inevitably have had great thoughts to express in prose and verse, and it is not surprising that they were sensible of the beauties of the intellect, and pushed the study of geometry to a very considerable extent. The value which they attached to this study may be inferred from the inscription over the door of Plato's academy, "Let none enter who is not a geometrician," a motto which, by the way, I would gladly see placed over the gate of the modern college. Archytas of Tarentum, about 400 B.C., had devised apparatus for constructing various curves, had recognized the spherical form of the earth, and its daily rotation. Aristotle wrote a voluminous treatise on animals, showing careful observation of their habits, and even left a treatment of mechanical problems in which he almost recognizes the nature of the parallelogram of motions and of centrifugal force. In the domain of physics, however, he is not particularly happy, and is better at asking questions than in solving them. A hundred years later, however, Archimedes, the greatest of the Greek scientists, not only makes great advances in geometry, including a method that is in a measure the precursor of the integral calculus, but displays an acute knowledge of the principles of statics, including the principle of the lever, and of the fundamentals of hydrostatics, especially the principle named after him. With Archimedes, as with the other Greek philosophers, the practical applications accompanied, and probably generally preceded, the theoretical inquiries, and indeed this is still usually the case. The Romans, who succeeded the Greeks in importance in the ancient world, certainly did not do so on account of their cultivation of scientific studies, in which they played a poor part. Their very clumsy system of numeration would show their lack of mathematical talent, but on the other hand their extremely prac |