Page:EB1922 - Volume 31.djvu/32

14 generally in the open air, where plans were discussed for strength- ening the moral fibre of the nation in view of the overwhelming problems arising out of Germany's political and military collapse.

After 1910 Eucken published the following works and pamphlets: Grundlinien einer neuen Lebensanschauung (2nd ed. 1913); Konnen wir noch Christen sein? (1911); Erkennen und Leben (1912); Die Lebensanschauungen der grossen Denker (ioth>ed. 1912); Die Trdger des deutschen Idealismus (1915); Mcnsch und Welt: eine Philosophic des Lebens (1918; 2nd ed. 1920); Deutsche Freiheit: ein Weckruf (1919); Einfuhrung in die Hauptfragen der Philosophie (2nd ed. 1920). EUGENE, ARCHDUKE (1863- ), Austro-Hungarian field- marshal, was born May 21 1863 at Gross-Seelowitz in Moravia. In his military career he had become commander of the XIV. (Innsbruck) Corps and army inspector when, before the outbreak of the World War, considerations of health compelled his retirement. It was only after the retreat of the Austro-Hungarian troops from Serbia in Dec. 1914 that the Emperor handed over to him the command of the army holding the Danube-Save line. After the Italian declaration of war the Archduke took over the command on the south-western front. At the time of its greatest extension his constantly changing area of command stretched from the Ortler to the sea. The battles fought under his directions on the Isonzo and on the Tirol front formed a series of successes. As a staff commander the Archduke was associated with Gen. Alfred Krauss (born 1862 at Zara), who was also known as a writer on military subjects. Under the new regulations concerning army commands in Jan. 1918 the Archduke received no further active command. As Grand Master of the Teutonic Order he remained unmarried. His unaffected character made him very popular.

EUGENICS (see 9.885*), the name coined by the late Sir Francis Gallon (from Gk., eiryecifa, well-born), and first used by him in his work on Human Faculty (1883), for what he defined as the "science of improving stock, which is by no means confined to questions of judicious mating, but which, especially in the case of man, takes cognizance of all influences that tend, in however remote a degree, to giving more suitable races or strains of blood a better chance of prevailing over the less suitable than they otherwise would have had." The word " science " used in this connexion is apt to be a little misleading. "Science" is used to denote two different things; it may mean the knowledge of a particular group of the laws of nature, or it may be used to denote the art of applying this knowledge in order to effect a desired object. It is clear from the context that it was in the second sense that Galton intended to use the word "science," and therefore a shorter and perhaps less ambiguous definition of eugenics would be "the application of our knowledge of the laws of heredity to improving the quality of the human race."

The aim of eugenics is therefore not primarily the collection of facts, but the construction and advocacy of practical proposals. The character of these proposals will of course depend on our conception of the laws of heredity, but the study of these laws forms the subject matter of the science of genetics. Genetics is a department of biology; and the last word in all controversies connected with heredity must rest with the biologist.

Like all the other laws of nature, the laws of heredity can only be ascertained by the carrying out of carefully thought-out experiments under standard- conditions. It thus follows that these laws must be investigated by dealing with animals and plants since we are not allowed to subject our fellow-beings to experiments or to control their mating. When we deal with human statistics we must therefore interpret them according to the laws which we have deduced, from our standardized experiments on the lower organisms, and in working with these statistics, the help and criticism of skilled mathematicians constitute invaluable aids to research, but mathematics applied to data unsifted by the biologist are valueless.

The popular conception of the best method to improve our race is to improve the environment, and for measures of this kind the American investigators have adopted the term euthenics.

"All men are born free and equal, " stands in the fore-front of the American constitution; and it is assumed that the differences between them are due to differences in up-bringing, to their mental and material circumstances in fact. If this supposition were justified it followed that the great remedy for many of our social ills was the extension of education, and on this supposition the social reformers of the 19th century have proceeded. Now it may be conceded that in order to bring out the full potentialities of any organism a favourable environment is necessary; if the soil be too dry the seed will either not germinate at all or if it does germinate it will produce but a poor and sickly plant; but all gardeners know that no amount of moisture or manure will ever produce from seed of inferior stock the plants which can be raised from fine varieties. If the poultry-keeper wishes for a large egg supply he must choose the breeds of fowl which he will keep; no matter how he feeds the inferior breeds he will not obtain from them a good yield of eggs.

One of the first questions therefore which presents itself to the eugenist for solution is whether the mental and moral qualities of men are inherited according to the same laws as govern the production of eggs by fowls. Gallon endeavoured to find an answer to this question, but the means which he adopted were decidedly crude. For instance, he obtained records of what he termed the good tempers and bad tempers of married people and tried to find out what proportion of the children were good-tempered or bad-tempered; and again he went through old lists of the results of examinations at Cambridge, and tried to show that a large proportion of the sons of those who had attained distinction in these examinations later rose to occupy important positions themselves. These methods certainly did give indications that character and ability were inherited, but they were open to grave objections. Thus it might be said that estimates of good temper and bad temper on the part of observers were un-analyzed haphazard impressions incapable of accurate measurement; and again, so far as the inheritance of mental ability was concerned, it was pointed out that a boy could inherit from his mother as strongly as from his father, and that in the case of Cambridge scholars there were no means of ascertaining the mental capacities of the mothers.

Since Galton's time, however, enormous strides have been made in attacking the problem of accurately measuring mental ability. The extension of compulsory education to all the children of the leading nations of Europe and the standardization of the curricula of education have provided investigators of mental ability with a very large amount of material. After many years' work and thousands of trials on the children of the elementary schools of Paris, Drs. Simon and Binet succeeded in elaborating a series of tests by means of which they could measure the degree of intelligence attained by growing children. The distinctive feature of these tests was their independence of any special type of instruction. They were so framed that, for example, a child on attaining the age of three could be reasonably expected to do the things prescribed for a child of three, and fail to do those allotted to a child of four. For instance:—

Similar tests were devised suitable lo the inlelligence of children of every age up to fifteen. At this age the growth of mental capacity as distinct from attainment seems to be complete. If a child of three could perform the tests arranged for a child of four he was said to be advanced; if he could only perform those suitable for a child of two he was said to be backward.
 * These figures indicate the volume and page number of the previous article.