XII.

"NOBLESSE OBLIGE."

In the former essays of this volume I have earnestly maintained that

scientific culture, rightly understood, is a suitable basis for a

liberal education; and I have maintained this thesis without in any way

attempting to disparage that literary culture hitherto so generally

regarded as the only basis on which the liberal arts could be built.

While, however, I have argued that, in the present condition of the

world, there is more than one basis of true scholarship, I have fully

admitted that for far the larger number of scholars, including all those

whose lives are to be occupied with literary pursuits, the old system of

education is still the best. Moreover, I have endeavored to point out

that scientific culture in no way conflicts with literary culture; that

it has a different spirit, a different method, and a different aim; and

I have only recommended it as suitable to those who are distinctly

preparing themselves for a scientific calling; but I have maintained

that for such men scientific studies, rightly followed, may lead to a

broad, a noble, and in the truest sense a liberal education.

I have used the term scientific culture _rightly understood_ in order to

mark a distinction; because a great deal that passes for scientific

scholarship in the world does not imply true scientific culture. In all

departments of learning, and not less in scientific than in literary

studies, erudition does not necessarily imply a high degree of culture.

We all value the labors of the lexicographer, and the work may be so

done as to task the noblest intellectual power; but there is a higher

form of literary culture than that which dictionary-making usually

implies. So also in science, no amount of book-learning constitutes what

we have called scientific culture rightly understood. For example, the

ability to pass an examination on the facts and principles of science is

no test whatever of the form of culture we are advocating. Not that we

underrate the value of such tests, or of the knowledge they imply; but

the ability to master a subject as presented in a text-book, and to

state that knowledge in a concise and accurate form, is the normal

result of literary, not of scientific culture. The power to do

something well is involved in the very idea of culture, and the scholar

who can pass a successful written examination has acquired a power which

literary culture chiefly gives, and that this power may be applied to

scientific as well as literary subjects is obvious. Here is a most

important distinction in connection with our subject. Culture implies

the acquisition of some power of the mind in an eminent degree, and such

power is constantly associated with erudition, simply because it leads

to erudition. But when we see erudition without such power, as we often

do in every department of scholarship, we perceive at once upon how much

lower a level it stands. What very different things are classical

scholarship and classical erudition; and is not the power which the

great classical scholars possess of interpreting the thoughts of the

classical authors, and of reproducing their life, the great element of

difference between the two?

So scientific culture implies the ability to interpret Nature, to

observe her phenomena, and to investigate her laws. The scholar, to whom

Nature presents merely an orderly succession of facts and phenomena,

knows nothing of true scientific culture. As there is a spirit in the

great writers of classical antiquity which ennobles the study of the

forms in which the thoughts of these authors were expressed, so also is

there a spirit in Nature without which facts and phenomena, however well

classified, create no intellectual elevation. The last century of the

world's history has been marked, more than by anything else, by the

increase of our knowledge of Nature, and it will be known in history as

the age of great discoveries; but valuable as the facts and principles

of science certainly are, greatly as they have promoted the well-being

of mankind, and important, therefore, as the knowledge of these facts

and principles must be to man, yet nevertheless I should never urge the

claims of physical science as a basis of liberal education if they could

be defended on no other grounds than these. It is here as elsewhere "the

spirit which giveth life"; and the power to interpret Nature, and to

commune with the intelligence that rules the universe, is the one

acquisition which, above all others, gives worth and dignity to the form

of culture we have endeavored to advocate in these essays.

Those who regard science simply as utilitarianism, and who value

scientific studies solely because they teach men how to build railroads,

to explore mines, to extract the useful metals from their ores, or to

increase the yield of agriculture, have an even more imperfect

conception of what is meant by scientific culture than those to whom

science is merely a valuable erudition. It is true that physics and

chemistry may be studied as arts rather than as sciences, and we have no

desire to underrate the importance of such technical education; but the

difference between the two modes of study is as wide as the difference

between the artisan and the scholar. In asserting this we do not forget

that the occupations of the engineer, the electrician, and the

analytical chemist demand a very large amount of knowledge, judgment,

and skill, and are rightly regarded as learned professions. But let it

not be supposed that skill in such professions is the end or aim of

scientific culture; any more than legal skill is the end or aim of

literary culture. If literary scholars regard the study of science

solely from this point of view, it is no wonder that they think that the

tone of scholarship would be lowered if it rested solely on such a

utilitarian basis; and, on the other hand, if they could once realize

the sublimity of Nature, as Copernicus, Newton, Faraday, and unnumbered

others have realized it, this fear that devotion to science must degrade

scholarship would disappear.

We are well aware that practical men frequently regard with undisguised

contempt the students of theoretical science, and that the greater

number of persons seeking a scientific education must look for

employment to the practical professions in which this tone too often

prevails. But, certainly, a narrow technical spirit prevails quite as

often in the professions in which literary scholars chiefly find

employment; and the new scientific professions are even more closely

dependent on the discussion of theoretical and abstract principles than

those which have hitherto been exclusively regarded as liberal. It is an

admitted fact, as we have shown in another place, that all the great

advances in practical science, all the great inventions, which during

the last century have so wonderfully increased the power of man over

Nature, may be traced directly to the results of theoretical study. For

this reason, if on no higher ground, we have claimed that it is both the

interest and the duty of the State to foster and reward scientific

investigation. The time is not far distant, if it is not already at

hand, when the scientific culture of a people will be one of the chief

factors in determining its position among the nations of the world.

We can not leave this subject without giving prominence to another

thought, which has been ever present with us while writing these pages,

if not hitherto distinctly stated. Culture, as we have seen, implies

power, and the possession of power also involves corresponding

obligations. Among the many blessings which Christianity and its

attendant civilization have brought to mankind, the recognition of this

principle is most plainly marked. The principle is assumed in almost

every relation of life, even when not distinctly acknowledged; and

happily it can rarely now be disregarded without incurring the odium of

mankind. It leads the possessors of great wealth to devote no

inconsiderable share of their fortunes to the public good; it

stigmatizes as miserly any neglect of this obligation; and the best hope

of preserving our modern civilization against the destructive agencies

of socialism is to be found in the increasing recognition and

enforcement of this saving grace.

But while this principle is, to a greater or less degree, acted upon in

all relations of life, it is enforced by public opinion with special

strictness upon those who assume to be the servants of the people. In

political life the obligations it imposes are already very generally

recognized; and still more strongly are they felt by the ministers of

religion. The politician who uses his high position to promote his

personal interests may sometimes escape his just deserts; but the

clergyman who prostitutes his influence for private gains is universally

condemned. So true is this, that a clergyman is debarred by his

profession from many of the industries and occupations of life which are

regarded as perfectly honorable callings for other men. A clergyman who

speculated in stocks, or even engaged in a mercantile pursuit, would,

with good reason, lose the respect of the very men who had gained their

wealth by the same ways which they deny to him. He may not, like the

members of the elder religious fraternities, take the vow of poverty,

but still he is held to a very strict rule of life; and on this is based

his claim to an adequate support from the people to whom he ministers.

Because "appointed to sow spiritual things," the clergy are entitled "to

reap worldly things" which they have not sown nor gathered; and evil

will be the days when this claim is disallowed.

Now, we hold that the profession of a scientific teacher implies an

obligation not less binding than that which rests on the clergyman; and

this is especially true if the teacher has been placed in a conspicuous

and responsible position before the world. The teacher has been set

apart as truly as the clergyman, and, if he uses the influence of his

office merely as a means of accumulating wealth, he is not loyal to the

profession which he has voluntarily assumed. Let me not be

misunderstood. There are a thousand legitimate ways of earning a

livelihood and acquiring wealth by means of the knowledge which

scientific study gives; and a man has a right to use scientific

knowledge for his worldly advancement as freely as any other knowledge.

But the man who has accepted the post of a teacher, and receives the

support to which his position entitles him, is bound to do the work of a

teacher to the best of his ability, and to devote his whole energies to

extending the knowledge of the science which he professes to teach. It

is of the utmost importance that the community should be educated up to

this point, and should hold its teachers to their trusts and obligations

as strictly as it does its clergy. Indeed, the scientific even more than

the religious teacher requires the aid of a correct public sentiment to

maintain the tone of his profession. Scientific knowledge and acumen,

when centered on business relations, has often discovered direct avenues

to wealth; the temptation to make use of the opportunities thus offered

is of course very great, and in most of the relations of life the career

so opened may be perfectly legitimate and honorable. But no one can

expect to succeed in any business career without devoting his whole

energy to the work, and there are conditions under which such a course

would involve the betrayal of a trust. Nor are the words betrayal of a

trust too strong; for it is sometimes the case that, besides neglecting

his appropriate work, the scientific teacher sells the reputation of his

position, and commands a higher price because he barters the good name

of the institution with which he is connected.

I am well aware that there is another side to this question. In many of

our colleges the professor has an inadequate support, and is expected or

even invited to supplement his income by what is technically called

"commercial work." Of course, in such cases the man can not be blamed;

but public opinion should be such as to prevent a respectable

institution from offering, or a respectable professor from accepting,

such a position. The workman is worthy of his hire, and the same

sentiment which demands from the scientific professor a whole-hearted

devotion to his work, demands also from the community for which he works

an adequate support.

It is undoubtedly in consequence of the inadequate support which

scientific teachers generally receive in this country that public

sentiment tolerates with them practices which sober judgment must

condemn; and it must be remembered that under these circumstances a

teacher, if he is faithful to the routine of his office, may devote his

remaining energies to commercial work, not only without any

consciousness of wrong-doing, but even with the approbation of his

associates. Hence, it is the more important to establish firmly in the

public mind the well-founded opinion that the endowed professorships of

our higher institutions of learning are offices of public trust, to be

administered solely for the public good. There is no hardship in this

position; since perfectly legitimate and honorable avenues are opened to

the scientific scholar, on which he may expend his business energies,

and, at the same time, use his scientific knowledge; and for many men

these avenues lead in the directions in which they can not only most

effectually advance themselves in worldly prosperity, but also most

benefit their fellows. Among the men of practical ability who have

developed a new industry, or introduced a new invention, and who have

acquired wealth thereby, are to be found some of the greatest

benefactors of their race; and far would it be from me to institute a

comparison between the practical men and the scholars. All we claim is

that the men of affairs should resign the endowments intended for the

maintenance of scholars to those whose zeal is sufficient to induce them

to make gladly the sacrifices which the advancement of knowledge usually

entails.

These considerations will appear still more forcible if viewed in

relation to the interest of the community in scientific culture to which

we have already referred. This interest has not been overlooked, and in

recent years a great many projects have been discussed for what is

termed the "endowment of research"; and already very considerable funds

are held by learned societies of the Old World, and smaller amounts by

several societies of this country, which have been devoted to this

object. But although means are thus furnished to a limited extent to pay

the expenses of scientific investigations, and very considerable prizes

are offered for the solution of important problems, yet it must be

confessed that as yet the results have been meager and have not answered

the expectations of the founders of the endowments; and the reason of

the small fruitage is not far to seek. A certain order of scientific

results can be purchased like other professional work for a price which

is to some extent proportionate to the skill required to obtain them.

Such, for example, are the daily observations at an astronomical or a

meteorological station; such also are chemical analyses and assays of

various kinds; such, again, is much of the routine work of a physical

laboratory. But the highest order of scientific results, such as leave a

permanent impress on the records of science--like Newton's law of

gravitation, Young's theory of light, Faraday's theory of electricity,

or Bunsen's methods of spectrum analysis--can no more be had to order

than could "Paradise Lost" or "In Memoriam" have been purchased by the

foot. Moreover, scientific progress follows a necessary law of

continuity, and important advances can not be made until the time is

ripe. The most that can be done with the direct endowments for research

is, to multiply trustworthy observations, and thus prepare the way for

discovery; and more than this can not be expected.

A more efficient means of cultivating science, and one which is certain,

in the long run, to yield a far more abundant and richer harvest, is to

secure the conditions which are known to be favorable to scientific

discoveries, and to hold in honor such discoveries when made; and I

think there will be little difference of opinion among competent

scientific authorities that the one essential condition above all others

is a certain atmosphere which results from the association of men who

are engaged in scientific study.

An association of scholars acts in many ways to favor either literary or

scientific production. In the first place, it leads to competition,

which, although a low motive, is a very potent one in all forms of human

activity. In the second place, the contact of minds engaged in similar

studies leads the student to take a broader view of his subject, and to

see it from the various points of view which the criticism of his

associates may point out. Above all, work done in such associations is

not done without observation, and there are present witnesses to attest

the results, and publish them with the authority which is required to

insure for them general acceptance. A great deal of scientific work is

lost to the world because done in a corner, and buried in the

transactions of local societies, from which it is not disinterred until

the work has been repeated. The advantages of such association are only

too evident to the numerous workers in science at the isolated colleges

of this country, who are forced to compare their opportunities with

those of their compeers in the great capitals of Europe; and the want of

scientific productiveness in the United States which we so greatly

lament is due chiefly to the want of the stimulus which combined action

so greatly gives. Happily, however, the conditions favorable for

scientific investigation are multiplying at home, and already there are

several centers at which the productiveness is rapidly increasing, and

gives great promise of the future. Moreover, this growth gives us a good

indication as to the points at which we can most advantageously apply

aid; and I am confident that there is no way in which we can so

effectively encourage scientific investigation as by establishing at the

institutions of learning, which are at present the chief centers of

scientific activity, more professorships and fellowships, in order to

give support to those who are ready to devote their lives to scientific

study.

The teaching which a professorship implies, instead of being a

hindrance, ought to be a great stimulus to scientific investigation. Of

course, this influence is greatly impaired if, as in many of our

colleges, the available energies of the teacher are exhausted by the

daily routine of instruction, or by the outside work required to

supplement his meager salary. But, if the teaching is only moderate in

amount and in the direction of the professor's own work, there is no

stimulus so great as that which the association with a class of earnest

students supplies.

Were it necessary to sustain the opinions here advanced by further

illustrations, we need only point to the Royal Institution of Great

Britain, which holds foundations like those we have advocated; for the

names of Davy, Young, Faraday, Tyndal, and Dewar, are a conspicuous

memorial of the very great success of such endowments in advancing

physical science.

It is obvious, however, that the endowment of professorships and

fellowships will be of no value to the community unless it is understood

that the incumbents are set apart for their special work; and the

suggestion that such positions could be used to favor private ends, or

as the basis of mercantile transactions, is sufficient to show how

inconsistent such a practice is with the true conception of scientific

culture.

Our patent laws have a very marked and not altogether a beneficial

influence on the scientific culture of the country. It is true that they

foster mechanical ingenuity and inventive talent in certain directions,

but they also set before the people a very low and mercenary standard of

scientific attainment, upon which the popular notion of the utilitarian

tendency of scientific studies is to a great extent based. No one can

question that the discoverer of a new process, or the inventor of a new

machine, has a right to keep his knowledge to himself, and to make the

best use he can of his good fortune to increase his wealth. But

certainly the motto at the head of this essay points to a more excellent

way, and it is at least an open question whether it is for the interest

of the community at large to encourage by its laws the more selfish

course. The argument by which the patent laws are usually defended by

legal writers--that it is for the benefit of the community to encourage

and therefore to protect inventive talent--is by no means so

unanswerable as it appears _prima-facie_.

In the first place, it may be questioned whether, in the present

condition of our patent laws, they do not hinder more than they foster

invention. Any one who has attempted to perfect a machine, or improve a

chemical process, knows to what extent he is hampered on every side by

patent rights, which often have no value to the holders except that

which the new improvement may give to them.

Again, the inventions which the patent laws foster are only those having

an immediate pecuniary value, and it is often exceedingly simple

contrivances--like the needle of a sewing-machine or a gaudy toy--which

yield the greatest return; simply because they have been accommodated to

present emergencies or to passing popular fancy. Such contrivances

usually manifest no extended knowledge and no special talent, and the

inventor owes his good luck to the sole circumstance that he was in a

position to recognize the want.

Now, every scientific investigator knows that the ordinary work of a

physical or chemical laboratory frequently demands inventive ability of

a high order, and that few important scientific results have been

reached that have not involved inventions as worthy of admiration as the

sewing-machines and power-looms which are so frequently cited as

examples of the beneficent influence of our patent laws; and the

question arises, is it for the interest of the community to promote one

class of inventions more than the other? Certainly, if we consider

either the sacrifice involved, or the ultimate good which eventually

results to the community, there can not be a moment's question which

class is the most valuable or most worthy of commendation. Yet the

patent laws not only give their immense prizes solely to inventions of

immediate utility, but also tend to raise a false estimate of the

intrinsic value of such inventions in the public mind.

Some writers have gone to the extreme of claiming that a man has the

same right in his inventions or discoveries that an author has in his

books; but this claim will not bear analysis. The first duty of a

government is to protect its citizens in the enjoyment of the results

of their lawful labor, and certainly any one who has written a book

knows that it is just as much the product of day-labor as any article of

merchandise. On the other hand, an invention or discovery may be the

result of a fortunate accident, and, although it may be the fruit of

superior knowledge and intelligence, it can not be regarded in the same

sense as a direct product of labor. It is much more frequently a free

gift of Nature.

Moreover, it is seldom if ever the case that a useful invention, meeting

a popular want, and therefore having a large commercial value, is in any

sense the product of one man. As a general rule, the patentee who enjoys

the right to the invention has actually added to the old stock only a

single detail. It may be that this detail was the one thing required to

make the invention practically useful; but it is certain that the

addition could never have been made if the previous knowledge had not

existed, and it is at least an open question whether the community ought

to grant to the last man an exclusive right to the whole inheritance.

Volta discovered--invented, if you please--the mode of generating a

current of low-tension electricity, which has been ever since, with

certain modifications, in general use; Oersted and Ampere discovered the

magnetic effects of this electrical current; Faraday, again, learned how

to produce an electric current from a magnet, and invented the original

dynamo-machine; Henry discovered the conditions under which the magnetic

effects of an electric current might be produced at great distances from

the source of the power. All these men were inventors of the highest

order, whose inventions have never been excelled either in the ingenuity

displayed, or in the influence exerted on the welfare of mankind.

Moreover, these far-reaching inventions were a willing contribution to

the world's knowledge, for which no pecuniary compensation was either

asked or received. Is it not, then, a question if any man of the present

day has a right to the exclusive use of these inventions; for writing

messages at a distance, for transmitting sound over wires, or for any

purpose whatsoever?

There is of course another side to the question, and I freely admit the

difficulty of the problem which our patent laws present; but I feel that

in their present condition they do more harm than good, and do injustice

more frequently than they protect right. I greatly doubt if it is safe

to grant by statute property in any invention or discovery beyond the

definite mechanical contrivance in which it is for the time embodied. To

grant the sole use of a well-known power of Nature to produce a specific

effect, although the effect be a novel one; to give the monopoly of a

process of Nature to the man who was the first to claim it; above all,

to grant the sole right to make a specified mixture of materials--is

certainly a policy which directly encourages vast monopolies, that tax

the public without rendering a corresponding benefit.

In this connection it must be remembered that the discoverer or inventor

himself rarely reaps the fruit of his sagacity or skill; but his rights,

frequently purchased for a song, are made the basis of great business

enterprises in which he has little or no share. On such a slender basis

have frequently been built up huge monopolies, in which the patent laws

have been made the instruments of oppressive exactions, and have become

the nucleus of a most complex system of usages and legal decisions, by

which the original intent of the laws has been wholly overlaid, and to a

great extent nullified.

Certainly, there ought to be some limit to the inventor's claims on a

grateful people. Admit to the utmost the inventor's merit; rank him in

the fore front of the long procession of the great benefactors of the

human race; rank him before Faraday, before Volta, and before Newton;

rank him before Washington and the Fathers of the Republic; rank him

before the patriots and martyrs who have died in the defense of human

rights, or in attestation of the truth: and yet, in virtue of these

transcendent merits, should he or his representatives be authorized to

tax his countrymen millions on millions of dollars a year? Surely, there

could not be a greater travesty of our motto, "Noblesse Oblige"; and a

system which gives a legal sanction to such abuses will soon force on

the public mind that most convincing of all proofs of perversion, the

_reductio ad absurdum_.

It is not, however, our intention to discuss the abuses of the patent

laws, much less to suggest the required remedies. We clearly see the

difficulties of the subject, and we perceive that it involves questions,

both of political economy and of jurisprudence, with which we are not

competent to deal. Our interest is solely to maintain the dignity of

scientific culture, and to demand for it the respect to which it is

entitled; but which is seriously compromised by the mercenary and

utilitarian spirit that the patent laws encourage and make prominent. We

are most anxious that the intelligence of our people should fully

recognize the fact that, among the students of science in this practical

age, there is such a thing as devotion to the truth for the truth's

sake; that throughout the length and breadth of these United States may

be found many an earnest student of Nature who, under great

disadvantages, and often at great personal sacrifice, is devoting the

noblest intellectual power, and the highest inventive skill, to the sole

end of advancing knowledge: and we rejoice to believe that the time

will come when it will be plainly seen by all that these silent workers

have been laying broad and deep-enduring foundations, on which national

greatness can securely rest.

Scientific Culture, and Other Essays Second Edition; with Additions · 第 26 / 35 题