ophy is particularly fitted to deal, and these it does not make, any more than science makes nature. They are present in every age as a part of the general phenomena of life, but require to be organized and stated in a reasonable form and subjected to a critical analysis in the light of the relations of thinking beings to their environment. In the bare they lack ap-. preciation and are not suited to the ordinary mind"the man in the street"-the everyday practical individual. This difficulty it is the province of philosophy to correct.

The average person does not philosophize-he goes about his business of living with little or no critical thought as to whether his ideals are higher or more deeply ethical than those of his neighbor. Yet whatever ideals he has have been formulated for him by suggestion chiefly from his teachers but also from his fellows, and are usually so submerged in unconsciousness habit that he fulfills or attempts to fulfill them with very little appreciation of their origin.

The point I wish to accent is this-that the ideals that the practical man-engineer and all, alike—is endeavoring to embody, are ideals that he either formulates for himself, in which case he is a philosopher, or else, and with by far greater majority, he receives these ideals second-handed by means of a selected and organized artificial experience, which is systematic education.

Those of you who are teachers, are perhaps, of all people in the world, the most ladened with responsibility, for the whole future development of both the individual and the race depends upon the results of

your labors in giving form to the growing mind. See to it, therefore, that your duties are not neglected. Let not your interest in science blind you to the fact that it is not nature but mind that forms the fundamental subject matter of your profession.

In this sense philosophy is the most practical science in the realms of knowledge. It is the great organizer, and whether we like it or not we must admit that it has given us all that we count most worthy in life.

Engineering is, of course, no more or less than applied science, and therefore, must be subject to the same influences that have helped to direct scientific inquiry. I think it must now be clear that philosophy is the yeast that aids us to properly assimilate and digest the data of science, and make it available for the practical development of the race. The use of our coordinated experience with nature is the duty of the engineer. His is the work of fulfilling the purposes and practical ideals which philosophy develops. But he must be assured that these purposes and ideals are reasonable, logical, and, in the broadest sense of the word, ethical.

I do not mean to say that the engineer has a monopoly of the practical realization of ends. This would open the question as to what is most useful in life, and it is a subject quite outside of the scope of this paper. I think the fact is that we must frankly admit the great practical use of all fields of work that result in race betterment. They are all parts of one general scheme of development and none can be considered in its true light apart from the others.

The rise of engineering has been so rapid and so

phenomenal that perhaps undue accent has been laid upon its importance, particularly in this country where our applied æsthetic sciences are in so chaotic a state. But we must remember that nations live and die with their arts, and the present widespread interest in æsthetics that seems to have taken root in this country, is, I believe, one of the most hopeful signs of a great and lasting future. Our ideals and our purposes are naturally so different from those of the older world that their expression must take a decidedly different form. And considering our practically untamed natural environment, it is not at all extraordinary that the great efforts called for in our struggle with nature should have resulted in a mastery of practical engineering problems that has quite surpassed anything that has appeared in any other modern people. There is also no need for surprise at the fact, that, having once directed our thoughts to the problems of life, our wits, already sharpened by contact with nature, should have brought to these questions new ideas and new view-points that have turned the eyes of the world in our direction. The problems of education have been attacked, and methods have been proposed and adopted that have completely revolutionized the art of pedagogy. And this has been due, in great part, to the psychological classics of James, Baldwin and Morgan.

The problems of the future are not, however, the problems of to-day. And this is nowhere truer than it is in engineering. The men who are now leaving our educational institutions are the men who are to meet and master these problems, and they must be ade

Narrowness of view

quately trained for their duties. is an ethical crime.

And engineering as a profession has certain relations to the rest of life that we should not neglect. Utility and economy are very well in their way but the problems of applied science are fast becoming much more than can be met by a solution, measured only in dollars and cents. The ultimate question is, what will best fulfill the needs of the race?

DISCUSSION.

DEAN KENT: On the general ground that an educated man should be interested in whatever interests humanity at large, an engineer may be pardoned if he devotes a portion of his time to reading a little philosophy such as he finds in the present paper. Humanity at large is now interested in Russia, in China, in the North Pole, in the Hague Conference, in the cure of consumption and of graft, in bacteria and protoplasm, in radium and electrons, in literature and the drama, in politics, in automobiles, in golf, in sociology, and in women's clubs. The intelligent engineer, to keep abreast of the times and to hold his own in conversation or even to be able to read with satisfaction in an ordinary modern magazine or newspaper must devote at least a small portion of his time to nearly all of these subjects. A hundred years ago he would not have needed to know anything about any one of them and therefore he might have devoted his leisure time to such subjects as conversation on the beauties of the Latin sonnet recently written by his friend in Oxford or to so and so's paper on the Greek aorist, or he might have reveled in study of Kant's

"Critique of Pure Reason," but the modern man has little time for any of such recreations. He must confine himself to the list of things I have given above with other modern fads, and if he meddles with philosophy at all, it must be in very minute doses. In fact for the last fifty years philosophy has gone out of fashion and it may be worth while considering whether the fact that it did go out of fashion is not one of the great causes of the scientific and intellectual advance of the race in the past fifty years. Nevertheless, every once in a while we see in some magazine or paper such names as Kant, Hegel, Schleiermacher, Schopenhauer, Hamilton and Lewes, and he is an ignorant man to whom these names do not bring some mental conceptions. The engineer who wishes to be educated should at least do so much as to read the article "Philosophy" in one or two good encyclopædias, but an engineer's life is too short for him to spend much time on the subject, unless he intends to adopt it as a hobby, just as some engineers take golf, others automobiling, and others novel reading. It is well that some people are so constituted that they can devote a large portion of their lives to a hobby; it is well for the information of the world at large that one man can spend years in collecting and studying musical instruments used in ancient times in the South Sea Islands, that another can study the languages of the extinct Indian tribes, that another can hunt for the north pole, another make explorations in Babylonia, another investigate the colors of butterfly wings, and another devote himself to the study of philosophy, which, as Kant says in one of