diff options
Diffstat (limited to '78906-h')
| -rw-r--r-- | 78906-h/78906-h.htm | 2576 | ||||
| -rw-r--r-- | 78906-h/images/cover.jpg | bin | 0 -> 238935 bytes |
2 files changed, 2576 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/78906-h/78906-h.htm b/78906-h/78906-h.htm new file mode 100644 index 0000000..6096c5a --- /dev/null +++ b/78906-h/78906-h.htm @@ -0,0 +1,2576 @@ +<!DOCTYPE html> +<html lang="en"> +<head> + <meta charset="UTF-8"> + <meta name="viewport" content="width=device-width, initial-scale=1"> + <meta name="format-detection" content="telephone=no,date=no,address=no,email=no,url=no"> + <title> + How to Conquer Stupidity | Project Gutenberg + </title> + <link rel="icon" href="images/cover.jpg" type="image/x-cover"> + <style> + +body { + margin-left: 10%; + margin-right: 10%; +} + +h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6 { + text-align: center; /* all headings centered */ + clear: both; +} + +p { + margin-top: .5em; + text-align: justify; + margin-bottom: .5em; +} + +hr { + width: 33%; + margin-top: 2em; + margin-bottom: 2em; + margin-left: 33.5%; + margin-right: 33.5%; + clear: both; +} + +hr.chap {width: 65%; margin-left: 17.5%; margin-right: 17.5%;} +@media print { hr.chap {display: none; visibility: hidden;} } + +div.chapter {page-break-before: always;} +h2.nobreak {page-break-before: avoid;} + +table { + margin-left: auto; + margin-right: auto; +} +table.autotable { border-collapse: collapse; } +table.autotable td, +table.autotable th { padding: 0.25em; } + +.tdl {text-align: left;} +.tdr {text-align: right;} +.up {font-size: 220%} + +.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */ + /* visibility: hidden; */ + position: absolute; + left: 92%; + font-size: small; + text-align: right; + font-style: normal; + font-weight: normal; + font-variant: normal; + text-indent: 0; +} /* page numbers */ + +blockquote { + margin-top: 0; + margin-bottom: 0; + margin-left: 5%; + margin-right: 10%; +} + +.center {text-align: center; text-indent: 0;} + + + +figcaption {font-weight: bold;} +figcaption p {margin-top: 0; margin-bottom: .2em; text-align: inherit;} + +/* Images */ + +img { + max-width: 100%; + height: auto; +} + + +/* Poetry */ +/* uncomment the next line for centered poetry */ +.poetry-container {display: flex; justify-content: center;} +.poetry-container {text-align: center;} +.poetry {text-align: left; margin-left: 5%; margin-right: 5%;} +.poetry .stanza {margin: 1em auto;} +.poetry .verse {text-indent: -3em; padding-left: 3em;} + + +/* Transcriber's notes (includes pagebreak before) */ +.transnote {background-color: #EAFEEA; + color: black; + font-size:small; + padding:0.5em; + margin-bottom:5em; + font-family:sans-serif, serif; + page-break-before: always; +} + +/* TOC */ +.toc-container { + display: flex; + justify-content: center; +} + +/* faux-h2 for front matter */ +.front { + font-size: x-large; + font-weight: bold; + text-align: center; + page-break-before: avoid; +} + +/* faux-h2 centered */ +.fh2 { + display: block; + font-size: x-large; + font-weight: bold; + text-align: center; +} + +/* Poetry indents */ +.poetry .indent0 {text-indent: -3.0em;} +.poetry .indent2 {text-indent: -2.0em;} +.poetry .indent14 {text-indent: 4.0em;} + + </style> +</head> + +<body> +<div style='text-align:center'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78906 ***</div> + +<main> + +<table> +<tbody><tr> + <td class="tdl">LITTLE BLUE BOOK NO.<br> +Edited by E. Haldeman-Julius</td> + <td class="tdl"><span class="up">759</span></td></tr> + +</tbody></table> + +<h1> +How to Conquer<br> +Stupidity +</h1> + + +<p class="front">Leo Markun</p> +<br><br> +<p class="center">HALDEMAN-JULIUS PUBLICATIONS<br> +GIRARD, KANSAS</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> +<div class="chapter"> +<p class="center">Copyright, 1927,<br> +Haldeman-Julius Company</p> +</div> + +<br><br> +<h2 class="nobreak">CONTENTS</h2> + +<div class="toc-container"> +<table class="autotable"> +<tr> + <td class="tdl"></td> + <td class="tdr">Page</td> +</tr> +<tr> + <td class="tdl">Introduction</td> + <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_3">3</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> + <td class="tdl">Learning How to Think</td> + <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_17">17</a></td> +</tr> +<tr> + <td class="tdl">Some Common Forms of Stupidity</td> + <td class="tdr"><a href="#Page_47">47</a></td> +</tr> +</table> +</div> + +<br><br> +<p class="center"> + PRINTED IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA +</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" aria-hidden="true"> +<div class="chapter"> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_3">[Pg 3]</span></p> + + +<p class="fh2">HOW TO CONQUER STUPIDITY</p> + + <h2 class="nobreak" id="INTRODUCTION"> + INTRODUCTION + </h2> +</div> + + +<p>Perhaps <i>stupidity</i> is a somewhat vague term. +In general, we know what it is. Webster’s +Collegiate Dictionary defines it as the “Quality +or state of being foolish; extreme dullness of +understanding; crass foolishness.” Dr. L. +Loewenfeld, in his thorough German treatise +<i>On Stupidity</i>, points out that the word may be +applied with regard to an individual or with +regard to single acts of persons who are not +considered stupid. The wisest person is capable +of occasional foolish deeds.</p> + +<p>I shall speak here of stupidity not only as +weakness of understanding but also as improper +response of any sort. I shall not, however, +particularly concern myself with awkwardness +of body. Moreover, I have considered certain +aspects of mental inefficiency in <i>How to Think +Logically</i> (No. 1063), <i>Insanity and Other Mental +Disorders</i> (No. 1094), and several other Little +Blue Books. I shall try not to repeat myself +except where this appears necessary.</p> + +<p>When we speak of a man as being stupid, we +mean usually that he has less than average intelligence. +But here we are again employing +words which are without exactness. Intelligence +cannot be measured as though it were a +matter of weight or specific gravity. There are +so-called Mentimeter tests, somewhat similar +to the army intelligence tests with which some +of my readers may be familiar; but they do not +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_4">[Pg 4]</span>entirely live up to their name. They do afford +a rough index to the possession of certain qualities. +They should not be used without considerable +caution, however. There have been a +number of unwarranted attempts made to draw +deductions from these tests as though their +value had been conclusively demonstrated.</p> + +<p>Dr. George A. Dorsey truly says, “I can test +your capacity or intelligence or your will only +as I can pick a winner at a horse race. I know +at the end of the race.” The whole idea of testing +and grading seems to be based upon an +academic fallacy. Who was more intelligent, +Socrates or Napoleon? Pasteur or Alexander +the Great? Shakespeare or Goethe? If these +men had been given Alpha or Mentimeter tests, +should we be able better to answer these questions +now? I think not.</p> + +<p>Stupidity is a relative matter, just as intelligence +is. In a primitive tribe, the man who +has good muscles, good vision, and good hearing, +with a certain amount of what we call +savage cunning, is amply able to take care of +himself. He may become chief and he is almost +certain to be well supplied with food and wives. +In a civilized community, if he is extraordinarily +well supplied with the endowments mentioned, +he may perhaps make a fortune as an +athlete. In this case he will not lack for wives, +either. But if he is intellectually of low grade, +he may not be able to retain his large earnings. +He is likely to spend them quickly for foolish +luxuries and to dissipate them by gambling. +Then, when middle age weakens his muscles, +he is forced to adjust himself to inferior living +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_5">[Pg 5]</span>conditions. Then he is called a fool—a term +seldom applied to one actually in possession of +considerable wealth.</p> + +<p>What is stupidity in a college town may be +ordinary intelligence in a mine or a sculptor’s +studio or on the baseball field. It may even +be genius. People who are extraordinarily developed +in one direction may be underdeveloped +in others. A man may be a great general or an +industrial leader without having an ear for +music. We are not justified in calling a scientist +stupid because he absent-mindedly hands +the conductor a button instead of his ticket. +His act is one of stupidity, however, as I use +the term here. If his absent-mindedness should +manifest itself frequently while he is conducting +important scientific experiments, it would +be indicative of great stupidity, of unfitness for +his work.</p> + +<p>What we call folly or stupidity may amount +to a lack of will power, an inability to concentrate +upon the problems of life. Or it may +be due to improper habit formations. Usually, +but perhaps not always, it is connected with a +lack of intellectual capacity in the narrow +sense. The idea of stupidity is after all subjective. +The martyr-masochist (we may take +Jesus and Socrates as examples, although their +lives as we have them seem to be masses of +legends) is a hero to his follower, a “damned +idiot” to the unsympathetic. But, from the +point of view of their own development, they +are not stupid. They do what it is within +them to perform and to suffer. Here I pay no +heed to the verdict of history, and rank the +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_6">[Pg 6]</span>unsuccessful with the successful Christs. When +Nathan Hale was hanged, he did not know that +the Revolution was going to succeed. He did +not know that the school books of his country +would some day set him up as a patriotic +example. If these states were still British +colonies, we should probably think of Hale—if +we thought of him at all—as a fool. We should +probably think of George Washington and all +the other rebel leaders in the same way.</p> + +<p>John Brown’s scheme was absurd. The +chance that his expedition should succeed was +not one in a thousand. It failed, and yet his +failure helped finally to bring about the abolition +of slavery. Edmund Clarence Stedman +was right when he wrote in 1859:</p> + +<div class="poetry-container"> + <div class="poetry"> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse indent14">And Old Brown,</div> + <div class="verse indent14">Osawatomie Brown,</div> + <div class="verse indent0">May trouble you more than ever when you’ve nailed his coffin down!</div> + </div> + </div> +</div> + +<p>Would Brown have been more of a fool if the +United States had been destined to retain Negro +slavery? In other words, is failure positive +proof of stupidity?</p> + +<p>I suppose the answer depends in the final +analysis upon our definition of failure. The +man who has given up his life to disinterested +service can hardly be blamed for not having +earned a large fortune. Even if we are unable +to sympathize with his motives, we must understand +that he probably succeeded in realizing +most of his own ambitions. Sometimes, indeed, +people work hard in one direction to forget +failure where success was most desired. The +laurel wreath may then fall to ashes amid the +applause of the unseeing crowd.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_7">[Pg 7]</span></p> + +<p>But in general we rate a man according to +his seeming ability to adjust himself to his environment. +We soon forget his petty stupidities +if he is able to do some one thing better +than his neighbors, provided only that his accomplishment +is highly rated. At present the +preacher who can send his hearers into convulsions +of religious ecstasy is almost sure to +get his name into <i>Who’s Who in America</i> and is +fairly certain, if he possesses a certain flair for +business, to amass a comfortable fortune. But +the same man, born in an irreligious age might +be simply a lazy good-for-nothing or even a +patient in an insane asylum. What became of +all the potential scientists who were born in +the Middle Ages and accomplished nothing? +Poor stupid fellows, most of them must have +been called by their neighbors.</p> + +<p>As a matter of fact, we know few people well +enough to be justified in calling them stupid. +Of course not all the feebleminded and demented +men and women are removed from the +world’s work. But it is better to keep the +definitely diseased mentally out of our conception +of stupidity. Since we are concerned +with the conquest of folly and since the mental +disorders are either incurable at present or +curable only by medical treatment of one sort +or another, we shall leave them out of account. +What interests us primarily is the correction +by the individual himself of his own +minor stupidity.</p> + +<p>We should understand, though, that mental +capacity cannot be enlarged by any effort of +the will. After an individual has reached his +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_8">[Pg 8]</span>full growth, his mental capacity may be decreased +by an accident or disease, but there is +no known way by which he or others can increase +it.</p> + +<p>Still, mental attainment can be raised, for +the reason that it is never equal to mental +capacity. To elevate the level of mental attainment +means (in the widest sense of the word) +to educate. What we call stupidity may really +be ignorance or lack of order. Moreover, lack +of order, that is, an imperfect scientific method +or logical system, is the most common cause of +ignorance. The man who has learned how to +study, not the one who has acquired a few +random scraps of information, is on the way +to becoming educated. The slow apprentice is +sometimes undervalued when he is actually laying +the proper foundations for his work.</p> + +<p>Teachers often fail to appreciate the merits +of the boys and girls in their care. If they are +intelligent, they can see that certain bright +children are properly acquiring their Latin and +their English, and may some day be teachers +themselves. But that the boy who simply cannot +learn his literary history may have it in +him to be a poet—that they are ordinarily unable +to understand, unless the boy is already +writing verses for the school magazine.</p> + +<p>A high school teacher once asked me why I +didn’t think of taking up the profession of +chemist. I was too amazed to reply. And +yet, from the ordinary academic viewpoint of +grades, he was justified in his question. I stood +somewhere near the head of his class, relatively +higher than I did in my English section. The +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_9">[Pg 9]</span>new science was of considerable interest to +me, even if the mechanics of laboratory work +proved somewhat irksome. But a professional +chemist must attain a certain amount of manual +dexterity and a considerable interest in the +mechanics of his work. It is probable enough +that some of the boys whose work in the +high school class was mediocre are now on +the way to becoming successful chemists.</p> + +<p>On the other hand, I feel that I appreciate +literature more intelligently than the classmates +of mine who were better prepared in +high school to explain the allusions in “Comus” +or to tell what Wyatt and Surrey wrote. For +me, at that time, the subjects were dull because +they were still unclothed with flesh.</p> + +<p>This bit of autobiography is set down here +for the light it may shed upon problems of +development as they are presented to the +teacher and the parent. It is not always easy +to tell the true trend of a child’s abilities. +Sometimes, indeed, the boy or the girl knows, +even if the teacher does not. When there is a +question of genius, perhaps genius is necessary +to recognize it. To the world it may be +the living image of stupidity.</p> + +<p>It is true that genius in the restricted sense +is such a rare phenomenon that most of us need +not concern ourselves about the ability to recognize +it. But the products of genius, especially +when they are of a novel sort, are likely to +prove puzzling. No less a critic than Henry +James wrote about one of Walt Whitman’s +books of verse: “It has been a melancholy one +to write about it.... It exhibits the effort +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_10">[Pg 10]</span>of an essentially prosaic mind to lift itself, by +a prolonged muscular strain, into poetry.” Despite +all Whitman’s tricks of false poetizing, +this verdict is decidedly unjust. The fact is +that James was not himself poet enough to +recognize poetry except in traditional garb.</p> + +<p>To stigmatize difference as inferiority is an +egregious form of egotism. It indicates a lack +of the ability of self-criticism, too. Hard-headed +business men are wont to look down upon poets +and philosophers, and these are accustomed to +retaliate in kind.</p> + +<p>The qualities which enable a man to succeed +in business are of course different in part—although +by no means entirely—from those which +make an artist. The musician and the sculptor +must not be judged too harshly for deficiencies +in their ability to carry on commercial +transactions. Many artists find it advisable to +leave all matters of business to agents or +managers.</p> + +<p>We must be careful, then, not to consider +people stupid simply because their experiences +and their ways of life do not coincide with our +own. If they do not possess that particular +wisdom which is ours, they may be amply +compensated in some other way. The man +who has lived all his life on a farm does not +know the city ways: but neither does the town-bred +man know how to manage cows and +chickens.</p> + +<p>When the scientist goes into a remote region +and finds that the inhabitants believe in +all sorts of queer superstitions, he should not +consider them all stupid on this account. They +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_11">[Pg 11]</span>have had no opportunity to learn the methods +or the conclusions of modern science. They +should be judged no more harshly than Socrates +would be for knowing nothing of the geometry +of Minkowski and the equations of Lorentz. +Living in his time, the philosopher could not be +familiar with modern mathematics. Living +where they do, the Arkansas “hill billies” naturally +cling fast to the superstitions of their +fathers.</p> + +<p>But the educated man (so called) who believes +that breaking a mirror will bring him +seven years of bad luck is, so far as this belief +is concerned, stupid. The authors of +Genesis are not to be reproached for thinking +that all the species of men and animals +were brought simultaneously into being by a +fiat of God. Considering the state of knowledge +in their time, their idea was natural +enough. But it is a disgrace when men calling +themselves scientists now shut their eyes to +the abundance of testimony for organic evolution. +I think we can call them stupid without +any priggishness.</p> + +<p>However, stupidity of one sort does not altogether +damn any individual. A man with very +foolish prejudices and without any particular +understanding of history may nevertheless be +able efficiently to manage a great industrial +establishment. He may or may not be a good +collector of antiques. His ability to tell good +music from bad must be judged without reference +to his other elements of mental and +physical strength and weakness.</p> + +<p>The only criterion we have for stupidity is +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_12">[Pg 12]</span>lack of success in one or another respect. And +yet, as we are all aware, the chance factors +play a great part in determining success or +failure. The successful general is not necessarily +cleverer than the commander he defeats, +even when their forces appear to be evenly +matched. The millionaire may differ from the +pauper simply in that he has had better opportunities.</p> + +<p>This and other considerations have brought +about various attempts to measure mental ability +directly. We have already considered briefly +the intelligence tests now being used by +various psychologists. Of still lower value, by +far, is phrenology, the pseudoscience which +examines the skull to find there an index +to the mental faculties and traits of character. +So far as the mind has any one single organ, +this is the brain. But it does not seem that +the shape of the head or the existence of certain +“bumps” on it bears any definite relationship +to mental capacity.</p> + +<p>Even the weighing of the brains of the dead +does not seem to give any absolute conclusions. +Pearson and Pearl, examining thousands of +individual brains, found that the mean average +brain weight of the adult Englishman was 27 +grams less than that of the Bavarians, 57 grams +less than that of the Hessians, 65 grams less +than that of the Swedes, and 120 grams less +than that of the Bohemians. Are we to conclude +that the average Bohemian is proportionately +more intelligent than the average +Englishman? Certainly not without additional +evidence.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_13">[Pg 13]</span></p> + +<p>A man who died in an asylum in Vienna was +found to have brains weighing 2028 grams and +without any pathological alterations which +microscopic examination could reveal. Gambetta, +the famous French statesman, had brains +weighing only 1241 grams, or 150 grams less +than the average.</p> + +<p>Aside from weighing the brains, all sorts of +measurements and examinations have been +made, but these <i>post mortem</i> intelligence tests +remain of indefinite value. Nevertheless it appears +that the structure of the brain is responsible +for the difference, or for part of the +difference, between a highly intelligent and a +stupid individual. But the physiologists and +the anatomists have not altogether solved the +problem.</p> + +<p>We do know that certain diseases sometimes +reduce intellectual capacity. A serious attack +of typhus fever, for instance, may leave the +patient feebleminded or at least comparatively +stupid. Injuries to the head or tumors of the +brain may do serious injury to the mind. Or +the gray matter of the brain may be injured +by various drugs, leading to more or less definite +mental changes.</p> + +<p>Probably a great many fools are such simply +because they have never had any chance to +develop those qualities in which they might +have excelled. In them we could not find any +physical basis for their stupidity, I suppose, +even if brains gave up their secrets in the dissecting +room. Of course education is not identical +with intelligence, but it affords means +of arrangement and order. Perhaps it is necessary +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_14">[Pg 14]</span>to add that by education I mean more than +the formal teaching of the schools and colleges. +As we have seen, we do not lay undue weight +upon the minor eccentricities and deficiencies +of the man who can write a great poem or +compose important symphonies. But let us suppose +that the potential genius never learns his +alphabet or his musical scales. All that remains +to him in life is his stupidity.</p> + +<p>It is sometimes said that the man who has +genius in him will not be stopped by difficulties +of this sort. He will somehow educate +himself. Actually we have seen men with none +of the usual advantages display sufficient power +of will to reach their goal. But we know little +of those who have been discouraged. Here +we have a certain justification for the democratic +idea of education for all, even if this +seems to lead to some unfortunate results.</p> + +<p>The educated fool, the man whose head is +crammed full of facts and who may possess +a certain fluency in argument but who is yet +unmistakably stupid, exists among us in large +numbers. At least in part, though, the fault +belongs with the system of education. Specifically, +the teacher thinks of the multiplication +table or the college entrance examination as +an end in itself, without regard to the individual +pupil, his capabilities and his needs.</p> + +<p>Even in our best educational institutions, +little progress has been made in the synthesizing +of knowledge. The student working at +his psychology seldom has it borne in upon him +that if the science has any meaning at all, it +is an instrument for criticizing literature and +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_15">[Pg 15]</span>for understanding life. Knowledge is not bound +up in little packages labeled English A and +Social Ethics 4 and Biology 9a, as university +catalogues seem to indicate.</p> + +<p>The more we learn, the more specialization +becomes necessary. And thus it happens that +we have admiralty lawyers, physicians who +have forgotten all that they ever knew except +that which pertains to the genito-urinal system, +specialists in the calculus of tensors or in plant +histology. This tendency to specialization, which +can hardly be escaped or regarded as an unmitigated +evil, yet stimulates the production +of wise fools.</p> + +<p>If the university professorships are many, +there is still room for instruction in the art +of thinking, which means really the art of +living. But here, I greatly fear, the qualified +experts are pretty conspicuous by reason of +their absence. It is, after all, a somewhat +optimistic definition which makes man the +thinking animal. Most of our reactions are instinctive +or habitual or inspired by our emotions. +In fact, constituted as we at present +are, the attempt to do nothing except as the +result of formal thought would be fatal.</p> + +<p>But perhaps the attitude of thinking for oneself +might be profitably encouraged. The ordinary +teacher is literally frightened when a +pupil discovers something for himself beyond +the text and the commentary. This is as much +as to reproach the teacher for not having done +any original teaching!</p> + +<p>It is a human trait to follow the lines of +least resistance. Therefore the intelligent pupil +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_16">[Pg 16]</span>reasons out matters for himself only when he +has failed to prepare the set lesson. Then he +calls his act one of “bluffing.” If his recitation +or his examination paper is found satisfactory, +he feels that he has outwitted the teacher. +Unfortunately there is a considerable amount +of truth in this assumption. But it is a truth +which does no credit to our educational +methods.</p> + +<p>If we are to learn how to think at all, we +must learn it by ourselves, and largely through +many trials and by rejecting a great many +errors. (In the final analysis, all education +is self-education. We cannot successfully be +crammed full of knowledge by any outsider. +A good teacher can do no more than stimulate +and point out certain pitfalls.) Some people +never learn to think for themselves—and no +thinking which is copied from another deserves +the name of thought at all. Originality is +the leading, the differentiating, ingredient.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" aria-hidden="true"> +<div class="chapter"> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_17">[Pg 17]</span></p> + + + <h2 class="nobreak" id="LEARNING_HOW_TO_THINK"> + LEARNING HOW TO THINK + </h2> +</div> + + +<p>“A being who could not think without training,” +says John Dewey, “could never be trained +to think; one may have to learn to think <i>well</i>, +but not to <i>think</i>.” The lower animals cannot +be taught to think at all, because they do not +possess the power to generalize. It seems that +the same thing might be said, with some +qualifications, of the less complex or “lower” +races of mankind. Among us, too, we find +a great many people of more or less vegetative +character. Their thinking is of the simplest, +and it occurs comparatively rarely.</p> + +<p>The elements necessary to thought are, according +to Dewey in <i>How We Think</i>, classifiable +under three heads. First of all there +must be an accumulation of experiences and +facts from which suggestions arise. As I have +tried to show in <i>How to Think Logically</i>, all +our knowledge comes eventually from our sense +impressions. The material used in thought does +not arise mysteriously, out of nothing, in the +mind. But with the store of experiences and +facts are inferences and ideas built up out of +the data afforded by the sense. Every individual +selects and combines for himself.</p> + +<p>The second element necessary for thought +consists of the “promptness, flexibility, and +fertility of suggestions.” That is, the experiences +must be available. They must +not be too deeply forgotten, but must be within +easy reach when they are needed.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_18">[Pg 18]</span></p> + +<p>The third element is the “orderliness, consecutiveness, +appropriateness, in what is suggested.” +The images and ideas may come up +in large number and yet may not assist efficient +thinking. They must first of all be relevant. +Also they must be available in an orderly +chain. The principle of order in thinking is +of the utmost importance. Furthermore, it can +be acquired much more easily than the ability +to gather a great many experiences and to keep +them within easy reach. Merely to hear and +see much is of little avail. We know the people +who travel all around the world and come +home to prove themselves as stupid and as +ignorant as before. It is the principle of order, +indeed, which gives the ability to accumulate +experiences and facts and to make use of them +at will.</p> + +<p>What causes us to look about us, to listen, +to taste, to smell and to touch? Instincts and +habits of various sorts. Some psychologists +speak of a special instinct of curiosity, which +is at the basis of all science. But I suppose +the accumulation of knowledge is in general +strictly utilitarian. Primitive man studied the +habits of various animals not because he was +trying to establish the science of zoölogy, not +because he had any abstract curiosity, but because +he wanted to eat certain creatures and +to escape being eaten by others, and then because +he had accidentally stumbled upon the +fact that some animals might be partially tamed +and so rendered of use to the human race.</p> + +<p>We learn first of all by doing. Of all the +proofs that the earth is approximately spherical +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_19">[Pg 19]</span>in shape, the best one to the man without special +training is the fact that it has been circumnavigated. +Incidentally, this proof is not +of much value until the earth has been circumnavigated +from north to south and from south +to north through the poles.</p> + +<p>Physics and chemistry did not originate in a +disinterested will to learn, but in the attempt +to solve certain problems of practical importance. +Even, now, the students of the pure +sciences justify themselves with the apologetic +statement that any scientific discovery may +prove of important usefulness.</p> + +<p>The “Why?” of the child or of the philosopher +is at bottom an attempt to learn that which +may be put to use. At present, indeed, there +is some tendency to make a parlor game of +philosophy, to divorce it from real life. But +wisdom is not desired as an ornament alone, +and the true love of wisdom cannot exist in +a vacuum. No valid distinction is to be made +between the wisdom of life and wisdom in the +abstract. The abstract is, in general, merely +a representation in shorthand of the concrete. +Such words as <i>fear</i> and <i>valor</i> and <i>justice</i> have +very definite reference to behavior. They are +not mere counters to be played with by learned +professors.</p> + +<p>Abstractions are to thought what levers and +pulleys and inclined planes are in the handling +of unwieldy masses. They assist greatly in +the ease, the range, and the depth of suggestions +which come up for the solution of a +problem.</p> + +<p>Thinking is problem solving. But if this word +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_20">[Pg 20]</span>makes us think of arithmetic and algebra, we +should note at once that we must not depend +too much upon the answers found in official +keys. Teachers and preachers and writers are +wont to state with all the flourishes of authority +what nobody knows or what, at any rate, +they are not intelligent enough to discover.</p> + +<p>To turn from thought to unreasoning faith +is obviously to confess failure. Sometimes this +confession covers only a small field, sometimes +it extends over the whole field of knowledge. +The Fundamentalist wants to find all his +science in the Bible, the Modernist perhaps only +part of his psychology and philosophy.</p> + +<p>Loewenfeld tells of an ignorant old woman +who lived with a tubercular man. The health +authorities warned her against using the same +glass from which he drank and exposing herself +in various other ways. “That’s foolishness,” +she said. “If God doesn’t want me to +get sick, I’ll stay well; and if he wants me to +get consumption, it won’t do me any good to +use a separate glass.”</p> + +<p>Of course many religious people proceed on +the more sensible assumption that “God helps +those who help themselves.” Even the piety +which is sure that miracles occurred in olden +days does not depend upon their recurrence in +our time. Yet there is a Christian sect, most +of whose members belong to the “upper classes” +and consider themselves educated, which +teaches that only faith can cure disease.</p> + +<p>There is not room here to discuss the utility +of religion or the possible existence of a deity. +The Little Blue Book reader can find ample +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_21">[Pg 21]</span>material dealing with these subjects in a number +of the booklets, notably the series by Joseph +McCabe. But here we may notice what a large +variety of miscellaneous follies have been upheld +in the name of religion. For instance, it +was formerly declared that the building of +railroads was inspired by Satan. At times during +the Middle Ages, all men who were indiscreet +enough to show themselves more learned +than the multitude were denounced as followers +of the same fallen angel. Mohammed declared +that faithful Mussulmans might have +more than one wife apiece, but that they should +drink no wine. Or rather he asserted that +tasting the first drop is the dangerous thing. +Some of his followers employed great ingenuity +in not tasting the first drop but in getting the +full advantage of all the rest. When Protestant +American Christianity borrowed this prohibitory +tenet from Islam, some of its leaders made +mental reservations to find similar evasions +for themselves. Perhaps some of them have +also believed that the enactment of Prohibition +carried with it the legalization of polygamy. +But, of course, the scandals which have circulated +about certain ministers are not enough +in themselves to damn religion. They simply +prove that human nature is human, even within +temples, tabernacles, and manses.</p> + +<p>Much has been said and written about the +stupidity of asceticism. If, however, poverty +and chastity are really pleasing in the sight of +God, and if they lead certainly to ineffable +eternal bliss, then they are amply justified. +Many a burglar has gone cheerfully to a term +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_22">[Pg 22]</span>of ten years in the penitentiary, his heart gladdened +by the thought of the little fortune which +he has safely hidden away to enjoy after his +release. Should not all good Catholics hie them +to nunneries if a little temporary self-denial can +assure them of so much hereafter? But the +priestly leaders see that the consistent application +of this doctrine would drive a great many +into apostasy and would leave no Catholics of +legitimate birth for the next generation.</p> + +<p>In theory, the Catholics have the Bible interpreted +for them by the Church, but the Protestants +read it and decipher its mysteries for +themselves. As we know, however, each sect +has its own creed. Only in a few of the Unitarian +congregations are the individual members +free to decide if Jehovah is a man or a +sun-myth or a force found in nature. Even +here I suppose nobody goes to church where +he cannot agree with most of the minister’s +teachings.</p> + +<p>It is a common tendency to hear and read +only those arguments which confirm one’s own +beliefs. The organs of orthodox religion circulate +among the orthodox, the liberal religious +papers go to the liberals, the anticlerical magazines +go chiefly to atheists and agnostics and +deists. Very few Republicans read the Socialist +papers and books, unless it be to find ammunition +for anti-Socialistic arguments.</p> + +<p>In the United States, the party system is such +that no particular thought is required on the +part of the voter. It is much easier to follow +in one’s father’s footsteps than to attempt to +differentiate the principles of one party from +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_23">[Pg 23]</span>those of another or to find out which candidate +for Keeper of the Dog Pound is best qualified +for the office. In a municipal election, the +Republicans always stand for economy and +needed improvements, the Democrats for needed +improvements and economy. Whichever party +has its principles approved, taxes go up and +the improvements are postponed. Perhaps I +am needlessly cynical: I have only lived in +two or three of the cities and read about some +of the others.</p> + +<p>The citizen who is not a politician by profession +can only give part of his time and thoughts +to government. On the other hand, the political +leaders make it their business to have the control +of things—especially of the treasury—in +their own hands. This is understandable +enough. But the civics teachers in the schools +teach their pupils that the government of the +United States is perfect, or at least that it +would be perfect if all the qualified voters went +to the polls. Despite the evidence afforded by +their senses, some good people continue to cherish +this naïve belief.</p> + +<p>But it appears that comparatively few minds +are capable of probing to the root of a matter. +Most are contented with shallow suggestions, +with some easy appeal to authority. It is so +easy to answer a complex problem with a name; +to say, for instance, that a lecturer for world +peace is a Bolshevist, and with that word to +shut off further debate.</p> + +<p>This fault is not confined to drug store philosophers +and American Legion leaders. Professor +Graham Wallas—in a book on <i>The Art of +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_24">[Pg 24]</span>Thought</i>, too—turns upon McDougall and the +other psychologists who deny the mysterious +energies hypothesized by the vitalists with the +assertion that they are furnishing a system +which the Bolsheviks turn to account for their +propaganda.</p> + +<p>Bolshevism is dangerous, many Italians and +Spaniards have argued; therefore a dictator is +necessary. But there is no true question of +<i>either</i> ... <i>or</i>. The fear of Lenin’s ideas has +contributed much to the decline—temporary, let +us hope—of the love of liberty in America. The +French Revolution had the same effect in England +in the time of Burke and Godwin. Hazlitt +wrote that “waking from the trance of +theory we hear the words Truth, Reason, Virtue, +Liberty, with the same indifference or +contempt that a cynic who has married a jilt or +a termagant listens to the rhapsodies of lovers.”</p> + +<p>The reason is that these capitalized abstractions +had been nothing more than words. If +liberty is once associated with a reign of terror, +immediately it seems corrupted to the thoughtless. +The abuse, for them, reflects upon the +proper use. Temporary associations must +never be confounded with necessary accompaniments.</p> + +<p>The rough and ready thinking of the multitude +jumps from the frying-pan into the fire, +from Lenin to Mussolini, from tyranny in the +name of liberty to tyranny in the names of +security and glory. If the licensed saloon-keepers +were friendly with the police authorities, +so are the unlicensed bootleggers. Regular +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_25">[Pg 25]</span>medicine is imperfect, but chiropractic and +Christian Science are absurd.</p> + +<p>When business is poor or wheat sells for a +low price, then it is time to send out the +Republicans and to elect Democrats, many people +seem to think. Meanwhile the attempt to +find real correctives is neglected. This is as +bad as sending for the priest instead of the +doctor when a child is dying of diphtheria.</p> + +<p>Such conduct is surely indicative of disordered +thinking, of a sightless groping for +associations. People accustom themselves to +living on the instinctive and habitual level, +and in times of emergency their apparatus for +thought is as if rusted by disuse.</p> + +<p>Thinking is not simply a discharge. It must +be directed against some obstacle. Must we +then wait for some great difficulty to present +itself before we employ our intelligence? No, +for in that case we should invariably find ourselves +unprepared. Thinking requires practice +at least as much as piano-playing does.</p> + +<p>But to talk of practice is perhaps to lead +astray. For our instinctive and habitual and +emotional responses are not sufficient in civilized +life. We must regulate them with thought. +Intelligence is always useful, provided only +that it is worthy of its name. Sometimes it is +imperatively demanded, but we can use it every +day, almost every waking moment. This is not +to imply that the mind must be in a constant +state of strain or that we should strive to rid +ourselves of our instincts and our habits without +regard for their demonstrated value.</p> + +<p>“Let me take the liberty further to observe,” +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_26">[Pg 26]</span>writes Richardson’s Clarissa Harlowe to her +hot-tempered brother, “that the principal end +of a young man’s education is to teach him to +reason justly and to subdue the violence of his +passions.” Is there indeed some connection +between just reasoning and the control of one’s +passions? Or, in any case, was either very well +taught at Oxford and Cambridge in the eighteenth +century? Or, for that matter, are the +ability to reason and the power to control one’s +temper communicated to the students in the +American colleges of the present day?</p> + +<p>Self-control is hardly inculcated in our +schools above the primary grades. Indeed it is +largely a matter for parents to attend to while +their children are young. Moreover, many good +reasoners have exceedingly violent tempers. +In the moment of passion they do what they +may afterward greatly regret.</p> + +<p>Of course it is stupid to act with unnecessary +haste and violence. But a bad temper +is seldom to be mended in adult life. Few persons +possess sufficient strength of will to correct +a tendency which should have been checked +during their formative years. The hot-tempered +are forced to patch up with what diplomacy +they may possess the consequences of their +thoughtless actions. Sometimes, indeed, a perverted +sense of honor causes them to defend +in cold blood the wrongs they have done while +excited. Thus they add stupidity of a gross +kind to their former folly. To confess that one +has been in the wrong is no disgrace.</p> + +<p>The egotism which fails to understand this +is a common cause of foolish actions. Obviously +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_27">[Pg 27]</span>it is difficult to judge oneself in the same +way that one judges another. We all know +that human beings in general are fallible. Even +the most intelligent of our friends and neighbors +make mistakes. Why not we? If we +truly grant the principle, we may find instances +in plenty. Then we have an opportunity to +correct many of our errors. But if we refuse +to admit their existence, our hands are bound +from the very start.</p> + +<p>A good sense of humor is a distinct aid here. +He who laughs healthily laughs sometimes at +himself. Thus, consciously or unconsciously, +he admits his lack of perfection. This confession +does not automatically open the door to +improvement, of course. It seems there are +some good-natured people who carefully preserve +their minor foibles in order that they +may joke about them. But, if they are at all +ingenious, surely they may be merry without +holding fast to their faults.</p> + +<p>The objective conception of self is absolutely +prerequisite to the attainment of an exact or +scientific system of thinking. In the mind +which overvalues self, immortality is an uncontradictable +postulate. The sun goes around +the earth, and the solar system is the center +and most important part of the universe. God +is like man—like the egocentric “thinker,” that +is. The white race—or, if it is a Chinese +speaking, the yellow race—is superior to the +rest. The United States is the greatest country +in the world, Indiana is the fairest state in +it, and Kokomo should be “boosted” everywhere +for the fine city of home-loving citizens it is. +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_28">[Pg 28]</span>When civic pride lends to improvement, it is +thoroughly justified. But when it is a mere +expression of vainglory, it is no better than +any individual’s blatant self-glorification.</p> + +<p>The first and most important intellectual +task of man is the control of his own body. +The work of self-control starts early in infancy. +The child must learn to put its food +and drink into the proper place, to walk, to +speak, and so on. This is not thinking, but +it is work for the nervous system as well as +for the muscles. Perhaps the beginning of generalized +thought came when the child starts to +mark out the boundaries between itself and the +outside world. This leg can be made to move +at will, that leg (which belongs to Mother +Dear) will move at Baby’s command only by +special favor. Previously, when Baby’s limbs +had been under a less exact control and when +Mother had run to obey the child’s slightest +desire, if this could but be understood, the distinction +between the I and the She had not +been so clear.</p> + +<p>Definitely to understand the self and its +limitations is at once to rule out all magic. I +cannot destroy an enemy by means of the evil +eye because there is no ray of malicious animal +magnetism proceeding from me. There are all +sorts of forces in the universe, and my special +powers conform to the usual order. If I should +lean far out of the window without in some way +being held back, there is no doubt that I should +fall. Like an apple or a bar of iron or a cat, I +am acted upon by gravitational forces. Like +all living organisms, I feed and excrete for a +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_29">[Pg 29]</span>brief period, and presently my body will decompose. +If I think and the milkweed does not, +this does not mean that I, as a man, am subject +to any special laws of nature. It simply +indicates that my ancestors have been acted +upon in definite ways—not all thoroughly understood +at the present moment, we must +concede.</p> + +<p>I have certain senses, and objects exist for +me as I see and hear and smell and taste them, +or as they feel hot or cold or painful to the +touch. In this way I am revealed to myself, +too. If I had been deaf from birth but had +nevertheless been taught to speak, my voice +would be little more to me than the sensations +in my throat.</p> + +<p>Perceptions are important as they are apperceived, +that is, interpreted in terms of what is +already known. Proper observation involves +orderly arrangement, as has already been said. +In training the powers of observation, the +essential thing to watch for is proper selection.</p> + +<p>As a matter of fact, we learn this pretty +well without any formal teaching. <span id="critics">The educational +critics who said that people do not +observe well, because they are unable to tell +offhand if the numerals on their watch dials +are Roman or Arabic, was misadvised.</span> Dewey +rightfully observes that we pull out our timepieces +to find the time, not to see if the fourth +number is represented by IV or 4. Most of us +can make the latter investigation without any +difficulty when it is necessary to do so.</p> + +<p>Every act of observation leads to a general +intellectual conclusion. This thesis, like some +others which are stated here, is developed in +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_30">[Pg 30]</span>my booklet entitled <i>How to Think Logically</i>. +At this point we may consider it sufficient +argument against the educators who would develop +the art of observation as a thing in +itself. Actually no one of the mental “faculties” +is independent or is capable of its own +intellectual development. Even the stupid +teachers who conceive of education as mere +memorizing assist to some extent in their +pupils’ learning how to think and do.</p> + +<p>All taught subjects must bear a relation to +personal problems. This thought is important +enough to bear repetition. Without such a +unifying conception, all attempts at education +are certain to be fruitless.</p> + +<p>One learns in terms of what one already +knows. The child who has seen a brook can +readily imagine the greater brook which is a +river. The boy in the city slums who has seen +no greater body of running water than that +contained in the gutter after a rain must begin +his study of hydrography here.</p> + +<p>This sort of learning prevents the formation +of two different worlds, one of what is contained +in books and lectures, the other of the +experiences of life. No man is a pedant who +assimilates his learning to actual problems.</p> + +<p>Yet Cowper’s words in <i>The Task</i> are frequently +justified:</p> + +<div class="poetry-container"> + <div class="poetry"> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse indent0">Knowledge and wisdom, far from being one,</div> + <div class="verse indent0">Have ofttimes no connection. Knowledge dwells</div> + <div class="verse indent0">In heads replete with thoughts of other men,</div> + <div class="verse indent0">Wisdom in minds attentive to their own.</div> + <div class="verse indent0">Knowledge, a rude unprofitable mass,</div> + <div class="verse indent0">The mere materials with which wisdom builds,</div> + <div class="verse indent0">Till smoothed and squared and fitted to its place,</div> + <div class="verse indent0">Does but encumber what it seems to enrich.</div> + </div> + </div> +</div> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_31">[Pg 31]</span></p> + +<p>The possession of considerable intelligence +does not protect one from occasional lapses +into folly. Certainly those who possess a great +deal of formal education are not on this account +free from stupid thoughts and actions. Their +great danger is that of failing to see their +specialties, those subjects in which they are +most interested and best informed, in their +proper relation to the rest of reality. Sometimes +they imagine that all the world is interested +in certain theories which they or their +teachers have developed.</p> + +<p>Men sometimes become interested in a certain +reform movement to such an extent that +nothing else matters. The universe is but a +place from which alcohol or tobacco is to be +driven. Or some form of recreation occupies +all their thoughts. Life is worthwhile to them +because it affords a certain amount of time +for bowling or playing pinochle or cheering on +the local baseball team.</p> + +<p>Of course the development of the human +being must be true to itself. We are not justified +in quarreling with a man or calling him +stupid because his interests differ from our +own. But the hobby-horse must not ride unchecked +when it comes into society. The ship-builder, +for example, need not bore us to death +about ships: he may do it quite as well talking +about his score at golf. But if he would have +people call him clever, he had better either remain +silent and listen to others’ discussions of +their vocations and avocations or else diversify +his own remarks.</p> + +<p>In conversation and in letter-writing, much is +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_32">[Pg 32]</span>merely conventional. We could save a good +deal of time, no doubt, by never saying “Hello” +or writing “Dear Sir.” In fact a great many +of the things we do are, from a certain point of +view, rather stupid. But actually we find it +more troublesome and annoying to revolt +against the minor conventions of life than to +follow them. Taken all in all, etiquette does +help much to avoid social friction of an unpleasant +sort. Yet it is foolish to be too slavishly +bound by the formal rules of polite society.</p> + +<p>A famous heroine in French fiction preferred +to be drowned rather than to remove her skirts +so she could swim. Many people have this same +attitude toward the conventions. But of course +the power of thought is of little avail except if +it can be applied to a practical criticism of +fixed habits and rules. Nothing is too sacred +for the thinker. Everything is to be tested not +by the standards of sterile authority but by its +value in the thinker’s own world.</p> + +<p>It is true, though, that we are leaning more +than ever upon intellectual authority. Who +has knowledge enough to consider and weigh +for himself the evidence against and for the +theory of organic evolution, Einstein’s theory +of relativity, and the theory that the works +attributed to Homer were written by various +men and molded into something like their present +form by ancient minstrels? Surely no one +man can judge all three theories with reference +to the full evidence. If we are to have opinions, +we must base them upon the conclusions +of the experts.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_33">[Pg 33]</span></p> + +<p>Very well, but what are we to do when the +experts disagree? Or when we are unable to +tell who is qualified to pass an opinion? Very +often the difficulty may be evaded. If we know +little of mathematics and physics and astronomy, +it is by no means necessary that we should +hold any definite opinion about relativity. The +attitude of suspended judgment serves well +enough.</p> + +<p>Let us suppose, though, that we cannot escape +in this manner. We are serving on a jury. The +defendant has killed the woman he loves. The +state calls a number of experienced alienists +who declare the man perfectly sane. The defense +calls upon a number of equally eminent +experts who explain his psychosis, dwelling +upon his inability to distinguish right from +wrong. We scratch our heads to indicate that +we should like to begin thinking but do not +know just how to start. Probably we should +never have been summoned to solve such a +problem. The long hypothetical questions are +too intricate for us to understand. How do +we actually come to a conclusion? Perhaps we +watch the defendant to see if he looks like the +maniacs we have seen on the screen in short +comedies. Or we say to one another in the +jury room, “There’s too much of this murdering. +If we let this guy off because he’s nuts, +there’ll be plenty more doing the same thing.” +Actually we should give the benefit of any +doubt to the defendant. There are infinitely +more lunatics executed than sane men who +escape on the plea of insanity. But the ordinary +man cannot recognize a malingerer. Sometimes +the experts require weeks of observation. +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_34">[Pg 34]</span>Yet, after a hurried and necessarily perfunctory +examination, they are ready to give +their solemn opinions in court.</p> + +<p>Often we are confronted with insufficient +evidence and yet are required to make up our +minds in one way or another. For the manufacturer +the question may appear in this form: +Shall I dismiss my workingmen, whom I may +not be able to get back when the busy season +comes, or shall I have them make up stock, +which I may be unable to dispose of? Such a +problem is usually solved with reference to +past experiences. But the year to come may +be unlike those just preceding. There are all +sorts of guesses about the future. Certain experts +draw intricate graphs purporting to indicate +the trend of business. They speak wisely +about cycles and counteracting tendencies. +Sometimes they are right—no doubt more often +than the mere guesser. And so the modern +manufacturer leans a little, not too heavily, +upon their wisdom.</p> + +<p>Any forecaster able to predict the approximate +course of the real estate boom in Florida +might quickly have earned enough to retire +from the forecasting profession forever. Here, +apparently, was a case unexplainable by the +thinker: very small causes led to very great +results. A few legal measures of interest to +the wealthy class seemed to make gold mines +of swamps and deserts. The chief causes of +the boom were of course psychological. Those +speculators who understood this took their +quick profits and went away. Sometimes they +were in too great a hurry, and the fools to +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_35">[Pg 35]</span>whom they sold their properties made more +than they.</p> + +<p>But we must not conclude that the stupid +people have all the luck. Intelligence makes +opportunities and employs them to good purpose. +Folly stumbles and is very conspicuous +when it stumbles upon gold. At the same time, +we must remember that wisdom is not the +only factor making for success. A beautiful +woman or even a handsome man with no brains +may have the thorns removed from the roses +of life just because of her or his physical +attractiveness.</p> + +<p>A matter of luck, obviously. But so is it a +matter of luck that one should be more intelligent +than one’s neighbors. Wisdom can be +improved upon—but so can beauty. Both are +controllable only to a limited extent. Perhaps +the advantages of clear thinking are not so +obvious as those of a clear complexion, however. +There seems to be a greater demand +for the latter.</p> + +<p>If thinking is somewhat painful, so, I believe, +is receiving a permanent wave or an application +of beauty clay. But it is only necessary +to have the fee to be seized upon by the beautifiers. +While the educational institutions in +America are usually hospitable enough, while +they even attempt to seize upon the students +who are sufficiently unresisting and permanently +to “wave” their minds, the results are +often unsatisfactory. In education the passive +attitude is hopeless.</p> + +<p>The problem of learning how to think is, +then, first of all one for the learner himself to +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_36">[Pg 36]</span>solve. Perhaps this little book may be read +by some high school and college pupils who +are dissatisfied with the narrowness of their +teachers, disappointed that they cannot come +into contact with more stimulating minds. Ah, +but narrow-mindedness and stupidity have lessons +to teach, too. Sometimes it is better not +to be influenced unduly by the wise: there is +a certain tendency to swallow their conclusions +whole. Many people accept Emerson’s +theory of compensations at face value because +it is Emerson’s, who would grin cynically at +the same idea propounded by Dr. Frank Crane.</p> + +<p>All our heroes should be honored distinctly +this side of idolatry, if we are to think for +ourselves. Of course we adapt them to ourselves +in any case. “Every philosopher has +his own Kant,” Henri Bergson is said to have +remarked once, when Kant’s authority was +invoked against some teaching of his own. We +know how Jesus is made to argue for both +sides of every question. He turned water into +wine at the wedding feast in Cana, we are +told. Yet Sheldon’s clerical hero walking “In +His Steps” thought it incumbent upon him to +destroy the saloons.</p> + +<p>It is not the truth which makes one free, but +the self-discovered truth. Yes, it might be replied, +but the important things have already +been found out. We know how the strainers +after novel truths are reduced to paradoxes +which they display with pride in their mere +contrariness.</p> + +<p>Here there are two replies to be made. In +the first place, the truth which one laboriously +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_37">[Pg 37]</span>digs out for himself may be either old or new. +Or it may be both: the ancient idea, as it is +discovered by one who lives in the modern +world, fits properly into his own environment. +It is no longer Plato’s thought or Aristotle’s, +but the new thinker’s. If it is true that there +is nothing new under the sun, it is also true +that there is nothing old. I am not what I +was yesterday. Neither is the street which +runs beside my house. Certainly there can +be no exact replica of Plato or of any Platonic +idea in the United States and in the twentieth +century.</p> + +<p>I would not seem to say that the truth is any +more true because it contradicts old ideas. +We are justified in pouncing upon every paradox +to discover how many fallacies the glitter +may hide. The paradoxical writers are chiefly +valuable because they do make us examine +their thoughts carefully. It does us little good +to have the conventional ideas repeated, even +when they happen to be true. We are not +easily tempted to analyze them unless we are +naturally of a skeptical disposition. But when +the ancient idols are rudely brushed aside, we +are aroused by the noise of the crash. We +rush up, perhaps to punish the delinquents, +perhaps to examine the gods on our own account.</p> + +<p>Some, of course, feel that falling upon the +iconoclasts is answer enough. There have always +been people able to answer ideas only +with blows. But the men and women who have +it in them to think are likely to pick up the +shattered pieces of the idol, to determine for +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_38">[Pg 38]</span>themselves if it is worth the trouble of cementing +together. If it has once been truly broken, +of course it can never be the same again. +Perhaps the bits of metal must be melted +down to be cast into a new form.</p> + +<p>Just at present there is a great deal of argument, +mostly excited, about the question: Is +war a necessary evil? This is not an “academic” +matter. Upon our answer depends our +attitude to the League of Nations, disarmament +conferences, military training in the colleges, +and various other matters. As usual, +most people feel qualified to say “Yes” or “No” +and to defend their opinions hotly. To answer +the question intelligently, a great deal of specialized +knowledge is necessary. Is there any +fighting instinct in men? Do racial jealousies +depend merely upon misunderstanding and ignorance—or +is there some deeper basis? Does +war assist in the advancement of culture and +civilization? Do wars promote manliness or +do they weaken the race by killing off the +brave and the healthy, leaving the cowards and +the defective individuals to beget the next +generation?</p> + +<p>Graham Wallas says we fight better than +our ancestors knew how, for we have better +weapons. Yet we are not wiser than they, +since we can only let accident and inertia +prevent a war from breaking out. We have no +positive means of controlling it, of being sure +that international peace will be kept.</p> + +<p>But we know that many wars have by no +means been accidental. For example, Bismarck +carefully planned the Franco-Prussian War, +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_39">[Pg 39]</span>making the French appear to be the aggressors. +Certainly most of the diplomats of Europe expected +the Great War to break out, and comparatively +few of them made any attempt to +avert it. As for the masses of the people, they +cherished blind hatreds. They did not, of +course, understand international politics.</p> + +<p>Why did the United States join the Allies? +Here is a question which our historians have +not been able to answer satisfactorily. As a +matter of fact, the question as stated is ambiguous. +It calls either for causes or for reasons. +Perhaps one of the important causes +was the clever propaganda spread by the Allies, +based to a great extent upon deliberate falsehoods. +One reason frequently given during the +war was that Germany was led by the godless +philosophy of Nietzsche. This is utter nonsense, +although it is still repeated occasionally +by clergymen and Y. M. C. A. secretaries.</p> + +<p>In 1812, when the young republic was faced +with the same problem of aggression at the +hands of both combatants, the United States +declared war against Great Britain, not against +France. But there was no definite alliance +with the side which had also acted guiltily. +Why did things turn out differently in the +Great War?</p> + +<p>The questions which I leave unanswered my +readers may, if they will, take for exercises. +After all, we citizens of the United States are +supposed to be able to answer difficult political +questions. Often we must decide between two +candidates for Congress, both of whom we +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_40">[Pg 40]</span>know to be unfit to hold such an office, on the +ground of their attitude for or against the +World Court or tariff reduction or some other +complicated matter.</p> + +<p>The elementary textbooks of economics +show that the “full dinner pail” argument in +favor of high import taxes is absolutely fallacious. +Yet this is relied upon by practically +all Republican campaign speakers. Again I +am not trying to prove anything—except that +stupidity is widespread. Certainly it would be +presumptuous and foolish for me to try to settle +the tariff question in a single paragraph.</p> + +<p>Sometimes, indeed, it seems that Hume was +right when he said that “reason has no original +influence,” that it “is, and ought only to be, +the slave of the passions, and can never pretend +to any other office than to serve and obey +them.” Of course there is room for discussion +about the “ought only to be,” in any case. The +passions make people do ridiculous things: if +the condition is hopeless, as Hume suggests, +we need not approve it. (Not that our approval +or disapproval would matter, if it were +so.)</p> + +<p>But the attitude of this little book is not so +pessimistic. I prefer to consider reason something +more than the art of inventing poor +excuses for worse conduct. At least in some +few individuals and at some rare times, intelligence +is supreme. The implications of such a +statement are many. I do not think that it +contradicts determinism, the doctrine necessary +to the scientific study of psychology that the +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_41">[Pg 41]</span>condition of the mind is fixed by anterior and +exterior circumstances. But if we admit that +the rule of intelligence is ever possible, we +are justified in trying to learn how to think—not +merely how to argue.</p> + +<p>Wallas says that thought “may start ... +without an immediate stimulus of an ‘instinctive’ +impulse from the lower brain.” To discuss +the matter adequately, we should need first of +all to consider the various definitions of instinct. +Yet it seems that there is always some +sort of stimulus from without. Thought does +not arise spontaneously. First there is a more +or less unpleasant feeling of incompleteness. +In other words, there is a difficulty, a lack of +adjustment to one’s environment.</p> + +<p>Thus, while we are wearing our gloves and +see them on our hands, we do not wonder +where they are. But if they are lacking and +we remember having started out from home +with them, we think at once: Where are my +gloves? If we have entered the Order of Jesus +and successfully subdued our reason according +to the regular system of discipline, we never +think: Is there a God? But one who has entered +a monastery without fully subduing his +ability to think for himself is likely enough to +wonder when his sexual impulses trouble him: +Is the immortality we are promised sure? Is +there indeed a God?</p> + +<p>But what shall we say of a monk who is +fully convinced that he will enjoy everlasting +bliss if he keeps his oath of chastity and is at +the same time unable to refrain from fornication? +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_42">[Pg 42]</span>Surely he is ruled by his instincts, not +by his reason. Even where religion triumphs, +the victory seems to be won by the emotions, +not by the intelligence. Often we find a mystical +union with God—or with Jesus or Mary, +to make the picture of heterosexual relations +more definite—standing definitely in the place +of the ordinary manifestations of sex.</p> + +<p>At best, we cannot rate reason very highly +in any description of things as they are. Wallas, +defending the originality and the power of +thought, yet says that some of the most important +steps in the process are unconscious or +half-conscious. This means that they are +largely uncontrolled, so far as the will is concerned. +The Freudian doctrine tells us that +complex formations actually develop as a result +of emotional suppressions. This much we +know, that the ideas lying below the level of +consciousness are not arranged in any logical +system which the conscious mind can accept. +Our dreams and reveries offer proof enough +of this.</p> + +<p>Flashes of insight, brilliant guesses which +we attribute to intuition, demand careful verification. +It sometimes happens that a man +leaps out of bed in the middle of the night +with the feeling that he has made a wonderful +discovery. In the morning, he may not remember +what it was all about. In this case he is +certain that he has missed something extraordinary +by reason of his failure to have a pad +and pencil at hand. If he has taken notes, +however, he is very likely to be disappointed +in them. Either they are valuable but yet require +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_43">[Pg 43]</span>much laborious amplification or they are +palpably worthless.</p> + +<p>Robert Graves explains poetic inspiration +thus: “When conflicting issues disturb his +mind, which in its conscious state is unable to +reconcile them logically, the poet acquires the +art of self-hypnotism, as practiced by the +witch-doctors, his ancestors in poetry.... +On being interrupted, the poet experiences the +disagreeable sensations of a sleepwalker disturbed +and later finds it impossible to remember +how the early versions of a poem ran.”</p> + +<p>The important thing for us to consider here +is that the poet, even if he considers his work +inspired, nevertheless makes corrections in it. +Sometimes the defects are small, sometimes +they are so great that the whole work is worthless. +Any interested reader may see what +Robert Graves did with the later drafts—those +he could remember, that is—of “Cynics and +Romantics.” These he gives in his book <i>On +English Poetry</i> in the chapter called “Surface +Faults, an Illustration.”</p> + +<p>The four stages in thinking, according to +Graham Wallas, are preparation, incubation, +illumination, and verification. The two stages +referred to by Graves are illumination (or +“self-hypnotism”) and verification or correction.</p> + +<p>Perhaps <i>education</i> would be a fair synonym +for <i>preparation</i>. For one thing, “the ‘educated’ +man can ‘put his mind on’ a certain subject +and ‘turn his mind off’ in a way which is impossible +to an uneducated man,” as Wallas tells +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_44">[Pg 44]</span>us. In other words, he possesses volitional +control. But if education, between inverted +commas, means attendance at a university or +at least a good school of secondary grade, the +statement is only half true. Some self-educated +men do lack the ability to concentrate upon an +intellectual problem. Others do not. The main +difficulty is to know when to stop thinking +about a difficulty. When is it truly solved?</p> + +<p>When we have found an algebraic X, we +can test it, usually without any trouble. But +sometimes the solutions which flash upon us +are not so easily tried. For example, I may +discover some important new principles of +government. Yet, not being a professional +politician, I have no way of introducing even +a slight innovation. Shall I test my discovery +by its conformity to the laws of political science? +But there is no such science, in any +strict use of the word. Well, I may write a +book explaining my discovery. Thus I should +be following the course of Plato, when he came +to the conclusion that the philosophers should +rule the state.</p> + +<p>Putting one’s ideas into a writing which is +published often brings about its verification +by others. Einstein worked out his theory of +relativity and tested it as well as he could. +Yet his own tests are not considered nearly +so important as those made by certain astronomers +and physicists soon after his theory was +made public.</p> + +<p>Illumination is the only one of Wallas’s four +stages which cannot easily be controlled. Yet +many poets and thinkers have been able to +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_45">[Pg 45]</span>use alcoholic beverages and even narcotic +drugs to good advantage. If the ideas won’t +come, sometimes there is nothing to do but +wait.</p> + +<p>But illumination may fail because the incubation +is defective. “We can often get more +result in the same time,” says Wallas, “by +beginning several problems in succession, and +voluntarily leaving them unfinished while we +turn to others, than by finishing our work on +each problem at one sitting.” The associations +come up, as it seems, of themselves, although +voluntary effort fails. If waiting is +necessary, perhaps another difficulty may +meanwhile be attacked.</p> + +<p>Or some exercise, like walking, which involves +no exceedingly complex mental demands +of its own, may arouse the fugitive +ideas. Idleness as well has its uses in the +incubation of thought. There is such a state +as that of being too busy to think. But performing +some simple task all day, for instance, +operating a sewing machine, need not prevent +constructive thinking. The ordinary workingman +of today, doing over and over again the +same piece of work, is in this respect better +off than the medieval laborer who made the +whole pair of shoes or the whole cart by himself. +If it is in him to think, his thoughts can +incubate during his working hours. Moreover, +he has a great deal of leisure in which to +verify his conclusions or to gather material +for thought.</p> + +<p>He can read books and magazines and newspapers +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_46">[Pg 46]</span>after he is through with his work. Yet +the man who reads much does not necessarily +think efficiently. He must leave time for his +thoughts to develop and he must acquire the +art of reading critically: else his reading probably +does him more harm than good.</p> + + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" aria-hidden="true"> +<div class="chapter"> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_47">[Pg 47]</span></p> + + + <h2 class="nobreak" id="SOME_COMMON_FORMS_OF_STUPIDITY"> + SOME COMMON FORMS OF STUPIDITY + </h2> +</div> + + +<p>There is, says H. G. Wells, an “empty gulf +in quality between the superb and richly fruitful +scientific investigations that are going on, +and the general thought of other educated sections +of the community.” Graham Wallas +points specifically to the lack of perfection in +politics, jurisprudence, and economics, as well +as to deficiencies in the coördination of biology, +physics, politics, and sociology.</p> + +<p>That which is truly scientific is precise. +Some of the attempts to make the social sciences +exact have failed because of undue simplifications. +Human behavior is a very complex +matter, and it cannot accurately be set +forth with any short formula—or with any +long formula that is at present available.</p> + +<p>The science of psychology, although it is +now worthy of the name, is yet loosely established. +We must remember that all the sciences +are subject to revision. Einstein appears +pretty much to have upset the laws of Newton, +which have been looked upon with almost religious +reverence for tens of decades. When we +wish to find the truth, we do not hesitate to +attack the errors to which the names of old +authorities are attached. Moreover, the man +who has the scientific spirit in him recognizes +that the truth he discovers is very likely relative, +that it may be overturned by another +truth-seeker.</p> + +<p>Darwin was a great man. Yet the scientists +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_48">[Pg 48]</span>of today, who accept his theory of organic +evolution, do not hesitate to criticize his account +of the machinery bringing about evolution—that +is, natural selection. So it happens +that the ignorant can declare Darwinism discredited, +with the implication that organic evolution +is denied.</p> + +<p>Truth which is relative, which is constantly +in a state of flux, is hard for the lazy-minded +to accept. But scientific truth (which is, of +course, erroneous to an indeterminable extent, +which probably will never be entirely accurate) +is yet infinitely more truthful than any +fixed dogmas like those of the theologians. So +long as scientific method remains in use and +there are eager workers in the field, we can +be certain that the truth of the scientists will +approach closer and closer to absolute truth.</p> + +<p>The warfare of science with theology is not +yet ended. Where once the battleground was +in the fields of physics and astronomy, now it +is in the fields of biology and psychology. When +the soul finally goes, what will be left for the +ministers? Probably a thin residue of ethical +teachings.</p> + +<p>At present the clergy are all more or less +afraid of the new biological and psychological +doctrines. Either they deny them or they attempt +to adjust their opinions to them, but they +cannot help suspecting attacks upon their +vested interests. Worse still, perhaps, would +be the uncovering of their own ignorance—an +ignorance of great profundity, in some instances.</p> + +<p>A great many agnostics dislike to see Christianity +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_49">[Pg 49]</span>attacked because they believe that religion +keeps the masses out of mischief. No +matter how thoroughly the doctrine of “Whatever +is, is right” has been spread, however, +there have always been criminals and rebels. +There is no evidence available showing that unbelievers +are more ready than Christians or +Jews or Mohammedans to murder and rob and +forge checks.</p> + +<p>To set up two standards of truth—one for +the “upper” or the more intelligent classes, one +for those who are regarded as inferior—is +stupid and dangerous. Absolute truth is supposed +to be important according to the religious +teachings as well as the principles of +science. When the members of a congregation +suspect the minister’s agnosticism, their own +faith is likely to be troubled. When there is a +slave morality as well as a separate morality +for masters, it must be based upon something +more tangible than rewards and punishments +after death. It has usually been maintained +with the whip.</p> + +<p>But in our civilized communities it seems to +be necessary to maintain masters and servants +without too frequently bloodying backs. I do +not wish to set forth the Marxian doctrine that +there is a great gulf between the capitalists and +the proletarians. Yet it is obvious that some +people have power and unlimited luxuries +while others go hungry on occasion. It is not +mere perversity or stupid ignorance, then—as +James Harvey Robinson and others of his +school sometimes appear to imply—which +causes all sorts of obstacles to be laid in the +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_50">[Pg 50]</span>way of the frank teaching of the social sciences. +It is the fear that valuable privileges +will be lost.</p> + +<p>It does not seem to me that there is any +likelihood in the near future of a Bolshevistic +revolution in the United States. Those who +possess intelligence and the qualities of leadership +feel that they cannot be the gainers by +any such overthrow. But a feeling that something +is being suppressed, that a censorship +of ideas exists, if it once gains ground, may +cause certain individuals to join the revolutionary +movement.</p> + +<p>The present capitalistic system, although it +is in many ways palpably defective, yet has +the merit of working. It is certain that the +sudden change to a socialistic, syndicalistic, +or anarchistic state would, at least for several +generations, bring about famine and a general +breakdown in various complex organizations +which we consider essential for our civilization +and culture. Perhaps we may gradually pass +into socialism. A number of paternalistic tendencies +(which I, personally, regret) suggest +that we are on the way. The importance or +lack of importance of the Socialistic Party +makes no difference. Just now, when the Unitarian +Church is diminishing in importance, all +the old doctrines of the Unitarians are being +taken over by the religious leaders who call +themselves modernists.</p> + +<p>But if we are in a transition stage, it is well +that we should know what we are doing. Our +fears for vested interests and special privileges +must not hold us back. All attempts +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_51">[Pg 51]</span>(conscious or unconscious) to make ignorance +into a Chinese wall are bound to be futile. +That sort of wall is undermined with dynamite +before it is erected.</p> + +<p>At present, indeed, the free study of sociology +seems to mean no more than the liberty +to exhibit that reason which justifies the actions +brought about by passion. That is, very +little intelligence has been brought to bear on +the problem of the relations between men. +Those who argue have opinions which seem +to arise out of their own temperaments, not +out of any objective study of the problem. +Thus they would justify Hume’s view of reason.</p> + +<p>James Harvey Robinson (<i>The Mind in the +Making</i>) says: “I mean by social science our +feeble efforts to study man, his natural equipment +and impulses, and his relations to his +fellows in the light of his origin and the history +of the race.... Human affairs are in +themselves far more intricate and perplexing +than molecules and the chromosomes. But this +is only the more reason for bringing to bear on +human affairs that critical type of thought and +calculation for which the remunerative thought +about molecules and chromosomes has prepared +the way.” He goes on to say in the +next paragraph that exact scientific results, +like those formulated in mechanics, are “of +course” out of the question.</p> + +<p>But we have seen that there is no absoluteness +about the laws of mechanics. The accepted +doctrines of chemistry have been and +still are being overthrown to a considerable +extent. It may be that two or three centuries +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_52">[Pg 52]</span>from now the laws of sociology will be as exact +as those of physics. That is to say, they will +be respected until further investigation makes +it plain that they must be revised.</p> + +<p>Precisely as psychology must be founded +upon physiology and biochemistry, sociology +must depend upon psychology. Just at present +the study of human behavior is in an interesting +but somewhat uncertain state. The psychoanalysts, +Freud especially, have brought in +about as much new matter as was previously +contained in the science. Much of it is immediately +useful, some of it is worthless or +even harmful, a great deal will be found useful +when it is digested. In a somewhat different +direction, the experimental behaviorists (not +all of whom have called themselves by this +name) have contributed much to psychology. +They, too, have made some assumptions which +at present seem to be unwarranted, but they +appear to be working in the right direction. +The new contributions came just when psychology +seemed to be in a hopeless state. The +teachers had nothing to offer but definitions, +and originality meant either the invention of +new words or the use of the old ones in new +senses.</p> + +<p>Right now we perhaps stand too close to +the recent developments to understand their +full purport. Yet we are justified in feeling a +certain amount of optimism about the future +of psychology and consequently about the formation +of a genuine science of sociology. Only +we must take an open-minded attitude, we +must not try to draw conclusions which will +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_53">[Pg 53]</span>justify our prejudices. That amounts to the +stupid destruction of unborn knowledge, perhaps +also of unborn wisdom. Intellectual abortion +is never justified and—at least one would +like to suppose so—never permanently successful. +It is healthier to think freely, to pursue +truth without fear.</p> + +<p>After all, we need make no special effort to +woo stupidity. It will be only too much with +us, despite our best efforts to be intelligent. +Those four “idols” or types of error of which +Bacon wrote long ago in the <i>Novum Organum</i> +still beset the human mind.</p> + +<p>The “idols of the tribe” arise out of sensory +deficiencies common to all men and women. +“The human mind,” according to Bacon, “resembles +those uneven mirrors which impart +their own properties to different objects, from +which rays are emitted and distort and disfigure +them.”</p> + +<p>We may notice in passing that Bacon here +takes up definitely the scientific point of view. +According to some philosophers, objects have +no existence except as the senses bring them +to the minds of men. If we were to agree with +them, we might not speak of “uneven mirrors” +except in the case of those individuals who +have sensory deficiencies peculiar to themselves.</p> + +<p>These are, to use Bacon’s fanciful term, +“idols of the den.” More particularly he applies +the term of predilections and prejudices +caused by the special trend of an individual’s +education or by the emotions under whose +sway he at the moment stands. These warping +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_54">[Pg 54]</span>influences are such that we may with +Bacon approve the thought of Heraclitus: +“that men search for knowledge in lesser +worlds, and not in the greater or common +world.”</p> + +<p>The “idols of the market” are the errors +arising in social intercourse, largely through +failure to use words in the same precise sense. +Even in spite of the careful definitions set up +by men of science, this condition exists. Sometimes, +in fact, the scientific definitions aggravate +the idols of the market; as in those cases +where a word used in ordinary language is also +employed for a somewhat different meaning +in a field of science.</p> + +<p>The “idols of the theater” depend upon the +peculiarities of various systems of philosophy. +It seems to me that these are largely “idols +of the market,” although the errors described +by Bacon under the first two heads are also +among them.</p> + +<p>Of course not all differences in opinion are +based upon the varying uses of words. If, in +a group of one hundred intelligent men, fifty +men say that they believe in God and fifty that +they do not, there may be five in each group +who really do not disagree. These ten people +may all believe in some sort of life force which +can be called either a vital impulse or God. +Of course the necessity to answer either “Yes” +or “No” deprives some of the chance to say, +“What way have I of telling?”</p> + +<p>In our imaginary gathering, we may suppose +that there are Catholics, believing in the Holy +Trinity and certain that the details of dogma +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_55">[Pg 55]</span>are definitely settled by the Church. There +are also Protestants of various denominations, +differing somewhat as to the conception of the +deity. There are Unitarians, with a still different +notion. There is a Mussulman, who has no +doubt that Allah revealed himself to an Arab +named Mohammed. There are deists and pantheists +and spiritualists and agnostics and +atheists. Also there are people who seldom +think about religion, but who call themselves +“Baptists” or “Jews” or “Unitarians” when an +inquiry is made.</p> + +<p>Certainly it is not possible to grade people’s +intelligence by the answers they make in a +religious census. There is some evidence that +the average believer in revealed religion is +more stupid than the average doubter or unbeliever. +Yet the most enthusiastic atheist +must admit that some who share his opinions +are decidedly less wise than some who subscribe +to, let us say, the tenets of the Roman +Catholic Church.</p> + +<p>Whence arise the differences in belief? The +beginning of the answer is easy, the rest difficult. +Most people belong to a certain religious +denomination because of the place where they +were born and the confession of their parents. +John Smith is a Methodist because he was +begotten by James Smith upon Adeline Smith, +who was then and who had always lived in +Atlanta, Georgia. Samuel Cohen is an orthodox +Jew because he was begotten by Saul ben +Isaac Cohen upon Deborah Cohen in Cracow. +And so with the Buddhist, the Hindu, the +American Indian believing in a Great Spirit +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_56">[Pg 56]</span>and various little spirits, or the Catholic born +in Dublin and going faithfully to mass.</p> + +<p>Do the countries which are predominatingly +Mohammedan have other religious needs than +those of the predominatingly Christian countries? +Or is there a peculiar religious instinct +inherited among the Turks other than that +which is inherited among the Irish? Lessing’s +wise Nathan expresses the view that since we +can learn little about God through direct experience, +we should believe our parents and +our ancestors. Yet this is but a form of egotism, +and a dangerous form, too. Why should +we consider our ancestors wiser than the ancestors +of our neighbors who belong to other +ecclesiastical organizations?</p> + +<p>Robinson’s <i>The Mind in the Making</i> is little +more than an attack upon this sort of ancestor-worship, +although it does not particularly deal +with religion. But we can hardly help returning +again and again to the theologians when +we discuss the stupidities which are honored +chiefly because of their antiquity.</p> + +<p>Of course, a change in faith, although it +represents a revolt against meaningless stereotypy, +does not always indicate any special intelligence. +People sometimes change their religions +merely as a matter of convenience. +(Here, of course, we are dealing with words +more than with genuine beliefs.) Samuel +Cohen of Cracow may become a convert to +the Roman Catholic Church because it will +admit him to certain political or social advantages +or because he cannot marry Michalina +Riboczech, whom he much loves, on any other +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_57">[Pg 57]</span>terms. Or he may come to America and find +that he is unable to earn his living except by +becoming a Methodist minister. Perhaps he +does not possess enough knowledge of the Talmud +to be acceptable as a rabbi, but finds +ignorance no barrier in a church where he can +serve as a living example of conversion to the +true faith.</p> + +<p>What shall we say of the thousands of Japanese +and Chinese who become Christians +without any ulterior motive? They find some +sort of emotional satisfaction in the new faith +which they have not been able to find in their +ancestral religions. Why? I do not think the +question can be answered satisfactorily with +our present knowledge of psychology. Nor can +we tell why one brother is a bishop and the +other a skeptic, except when there is an element +of hypocrisy in one case.</p> + +<p>The religious attitude is one of belief based +upon little or no evidence. Beyond the field +which we consider religious, we regard such +an attitude as stupid. As a matter of fact, +though, we are influenced everywhere by “such +factors of belief as fear and hope, prejudice +and passion, imitation and partisanship, the +circumpressure of our caste and set.” William +James, whose words I have thus employed, +argues that because these elements are universal, +they are therefore justifiable.</p> + +<p>Because we have been considering absolute +truth and because the argument is ingenious, +I will here quote some sentences from James’s +<i>The Will to Believe</i>:</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_58">[Pg 58]</span></p> + +<blockquote> +<p>Our belief in truth itself, for instance, that there +is a truth, and that our minds and it are made for +each other—what is it but a passionate affirmation +of desire, in which our social system backs us up? +We want to have a truth; we want to believe that +our experiments and studies and discussions must +put us in a continually better and better position +towards it; and on this line we agree to fight out +our thinking lives. But if a pyrrhonistic skeptic +asks us <i>how we know</i> all this, can our logic find a +reply? No! certainly it cannot. It is just one volition +against another—we are willing to go in for +life upon a trust or assumption which he, for his +part, does not care to make.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>But if this be unanswerable, then it destroys +the system which James is trying to erect. If +<i>truth</i> has any meaning at all, it must not be +applied to that which is unproved and seemingly +unprovable. If we are to think with +any accuracy, of course we must recognize that +<i>truth</i> and <i>proof</i> are not absolutes. This recognition +gives us no cause for returning to the +physiology and astrology of the Middle Ages or +for postulating God and immortality and free +will, when these conceptions seem to be unnecessary +for modern scientific thought.</p> + +<p>James wrote <i>The Will to Believe</i> as an attack +upon the attitude represented in <i>The +Ethics of Belief</i> by William Kingdon Clifford. +Of Clifford’s viewpoint there is a brief summary +in his own words:</p> + + +<blockquote> +<p>We may believe what goes beyond our experience, +only when it is inferred from that experience by the +assumption that what we do not know is like what +we know.</p> + +<p>We may believe the statement of another person +when there is reasonable ground for supposing that +he knows the matter of which he speaks and that +he is speaking the truth so far as he knows it.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_59">[Pg 59]</span></p> + +<p>It is wrong in all cases to believe on insufficient +evidence; and where it is presumption to doubt and +to investigate, then it is worse than presumption to +believe.</p> +</blockquote> + +<p>These seem to be principles which we can +apply. Certainly there exists no general need +to believe whenever intellectual options present +themselves. Often, as we have seen, we +are expected to act on insufficient information. +Thus, the man who declares that he does not +know whether there is or is not a God who +wishes to be worshipped must either attend +church—as though he believed in this sort of +divinity—or stay away—as though he did not. +Or, though he conceives the possibility that +Jehovah wishes to be praised, he may refrain +from church attendance and prayer because he +has no way of knowing what may be the +proper manner in which to go about the matter.</p> + +<p>It is not what one believes that matters, except +as this is shown in what one does. Therefore +a deficiency in will power is at the bottom +of much stupidity. Our worldly hells are paved +with good intentions. “It is in human nature,” +according to Anatole France, “to think wisely +and to act in an absurd fashion.”</p> + +<p>The shrewdest of business men are caught +unaware and imposed upon by swindlers. Many +of the tricks commonly employed depend upon +the victim’s readiness to share in a doubtful +deal. He is made to feel a great joy at the +thought of his own acuteness, which joy occupies +him to such an extent that his intellectual +powers are impaired. Moreover, the victim is +given to suppose that great haste is required. +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_60">[Pg 60]</span>At last, when he discovers that he has been +beswindled, his vanity usually makes him keep +silent. He would be loath to have people know +that he is neither as honest nor as wise as he +is reputed. Egotism is one of the chief causes +of folly, as we have already had occasion to +notice.</p> + +<p>Some people who are not conspicuous for +direct vanity yet show the vice indirectly, +through their blind preferences for their own +families, their own parties, their own causes. +“Wrong or right, my country,” is no wiser a +saying than “Right or wrong, my prejudices.” +The recent attempts to make out a case for +Germanic or Nordic supremacy are entirely +ridiculous. As a matter of fact, most Englishmen +are racially about the same as most +Frenchmen.</p> + +<p>It is by no means so evident as it once +seemed that the white race is far superior to +those of a darker hue. There are even Europeans +and Americans who declare the Chinese +and the Japanese are wiser than we. As to the +negro race, there is but little evidence that it +stands on a low intellectual level because of +organic limitations. A few colored people of +pure blood have performed outstanding achievements. +We have reason to believe that their +accomplishments are exceptional only because +the negroes have had few educational opportunities. +The colored people living in the north +seem to be more alert and less stupid than +those working in the fields of Mississippi and +Florida.</p> + +<p>Woltmann declares that the negroes are inferior +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_61">[Pg 61]</span>because they attain the age of puberty +sooner. At this time, according to some students +of the matter, brain development ceases. +If this were the case, and if the rate of brain +development while it lasts were the same in +all races, then we should be able to grade intelligence +among races according to climate. +We should expect the Eskimos, to whom nubility +comes late, to be far more intelligent than +the Spanish and Italians, to whom it comes +early. But we have no reason to come to any +such conclusion.</p> + +<p>Otto Ammon, after studying the people of +Baden, came to the conclusion that the Nordics +(with long heads, blue eyes, and blond hair) +are superior to those of Alpine derivation (with +short heads and dark hair). But he and the +writers in Germany and other countries who +agree with him have assumed rather than +proved their conclusions. By way of rebuttal, +Loewenfeld declares that the two greatest German +philosophers, Kant and Schopenhauer, +were both short-headed. Goethe, whatever +shape his skull may have had, certainly possessed +dark hair and eyes. The assumption of +Nordic superiority is based upon prejudice +rather than upon scientific evidence.</p> + +<p>Is stupidity more common among the poor +than among the rich? Of course we are unable +to answer such questions accurately because +of the lack of dependable criteria. But we +know that most persons want to become wealthy +and we may reasonably infer that those who +acquire fortunes do excel in certain intellectual +characteristics. That these traits or general +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_62">[Pg 62]</span>mental superiority is transmitted to rich men’s +children is sometimes asserted. Of course they +are likely to have special educational facilities. +Besides this, they have unusual opportunities to +show what they can do in positions of responsibility.</p> + +<p>And yet they often prove to be inferior in +business or in the professions to the children +of the poor. Often they have failed to acquire +habits of industry. Or else they are anxious +to do no work which might seem menial or +undignified.</p> + +<p>There can be no question that most dynasties +have been founded by men of unusual ability. +Nevertheless, the kings and queens of Europe +are in most cases persons of merely average +intellect. Psychoses and neuroses are not rare +among them. Perhaps a partial explanation of +royal degeneration is to be found in their inbreeding. +The mixed fruit of royalty and the +common people is almost always declared +illegitimate.</p> + +<p>Very few great men have had children gifted +with genius. So far, the laws of heredity explain +comparatively little about the sudden appearance +of remarkable traits. But the children +of intelligent people are likely to be less +stupid than those whose parents are fools. The +factors of original nature and of education are +both in favor of the former class.</p> + +<p>Forms of stupidity vary much with time and +place. The tendency to do as one’s fellows do +is a strong one. Especially in a mob, it sometimes +appears that the prevailing level of intelligence +is that of the most stupid members. +<span class="pagenum" id="Page_63">[Pg 63]</span>But mob psychology deals in general with +states of excitement. Sometimes actions are +attributed to mere numbers which are due to +emotional stress felt by all the individuals in +the crowd.</p> + +<p>For intelligence is no guarantee against impulsive +action. Love and hate and fear and +jealousy and sympathy make normally wise +people do exceedingly foolish things. The mob +is capable of killing innocent persons. So is +almost any man, when his hate is aroused.</p> + +<div class="poetry-container"> + <div class="poetry"> + <div class="stanza"> + <div class="verse indent0">And all men kill the thing they love,</div> + <div class="verse indent2">By all let this be heard,</div> + <div class="verse indent0">Some do it with a bitter look,</div> + <div class="verse indent2">Some with a flattering word.</div> + </div> + </div> +</div> + +<p>These verses of Oscar Wilde’s are justified. +The passions do not exert themselves in a definite +and controlled direction. Therefore love +can slay about as well as hate. Probably better, +for the opportunities are greater.</p> + +<p>Physical ill health is at the bottom of much +stupidity. Although the direct influence upon +the higher nervous centers may be little, there +are all sorts of indirect effects caused by illness. +Frequently the patient is in a constant +state of suppressed anger. Any trifle makes +him find fault with his physician and his +attendants.</p> + +<p>Sometimes, indeed, the patient does not become +angry with his nurse. He may fall into +an attitude of dependence upon her. This occasionally—especially +in the case of men just +entering the first stage of senile dementia—leads +to foolish marriages.</p> + +<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_64">[Pg 64]</span></p> + +<p>Old age, like childhood, is more or less the +scene of folly. Comparatively few individuals +are as intelligent in the 70’s and 80’s as they +were in the 30’s and 40’s. Most men are physically +strongest at about the age of 25. The +height of mental power comes later, perhaps +at about 45. After that the memory tends to +decline. The other mental traits become impaired +usually in the 60’s.</p> + +<p>The folly peculiar to youth depends largely +upon lack of experience. Deficiency in self-control +is also an important element—one, to +be sure, that frequently lasts through life. +Child prodigies usually show a one-sided development. +Though they may be quick thinkers, +they seldom probe deeply.</p> + +<p>The thinker is immature until he has a supply +of experiences and ideas at his service. +These will come, if he only learns to apply the +principle of order. This is the instrument with +which we make the most of our minds. When +we learn how to use order, we become as gods. +For then we can take the chaos about us and +build it into a universe.</p> + +<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop"> +<div class="transnote"> + <h2 class="nobreak" id="Transcribers_Notes"> + Transcriber’s Notes + </h2> +<p> + <span style="margin-left: 1.0em;">Minor typographical and spelling errors have been corrected</span><br> + <span style="margin-left: 1.0em;">p. <a href="#critics">29</a> retained unchanged the sentence beginning “The educational critics”</span> +</p> +</div> +</main> +<div style='text-align:center'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK 78906 ***</div> +</body> +</html> diff --git a/78906-h/images/cover.jpg b/78906-h/images/cover.jpg Binary files differnew file mode 100644 index 0000000..736a593 --- /dev/null +++ b/78906-h/images/cover.jpg |
