The present issue of Blackfriars contains the substance of the papers read at the Annual General Meeting of the University Catholic Federation of Great Britain held at Birmingham from April ioth to 12th, 1942, on the general theme of ‘Science and Society.’ We are particularly grateful to the Federation and the speakers for permission to print the collected papers in this special number. We make no apology to our readers for occupying nearly every page with this subject, for there are few now who do not recognise the supreme importance with which modern science is—justly or unjustly—invested. In view of this unique position, the meeting at Birmingham was of special significance for the future.

Until recently there were only two views expressed on science that counted. First there was the handful of philosophers who sought to prevent the flood of experimental knowledge and description from bursting into other fields of knowledge. Jacques Maritain stands head and shoulders above all others here, in his constant effort to mark out the boundaries of the sciences. But there have been others with less insight who have tried to effect this result by a radical attack on science itself. Many of them speak in the name of philosophy or religion, but few attain the balanced judgment of the French philosopher. At a time of scientific warfare it is easy to throw unintelligent bricks at a carefully constructed glasshouse of science.

In discussions concerned with its history, rigid or narrow interpretations of the term ‘science ‘are to be avoided. The purpose of examining the history of science is, apart from mere antiquarianism, the desire to place modern science in a perspective whcredit may be seen in relation to other human activities, past, present and, perhaps, future; and to that purpose all from which science has grown is relevant. Mathematics may not be science, but Greek physios developed in great measure from geometry. The Egyptian goldsmith and Assyrian potter were not men of science, but chemistry developed from their labours; and between the beginnings of the use of tools and the industrial civilisation of to-day there is no moment of which we may say ‘Here began Science.’ In the words of Roger Bacon (Compendia Studii., Cap. v, quoted by Duhem) :

But, in agreeing to allow a wide interpretation to the term Science, we are not to forget that we shall include therein several different activities, notably those of the craftsman, the observer of nature, the philosopher and ontologist, the histories of which may not always, especially in the early period, be very closely linked.

Faced with the great human crisis of our times, it is only natural that the scientist should fee! that he has his contribution to make towards a solution of our one great problem—to secure the survival of the things that are good. The scientist has, moreover, a certain confidence that his contribution is important, perhaps even decisive, and certainly indispensable. He is confirmed in this view by the reflection that a large proportion of the world’s troubles may be traced to a desertion of scientific ideals, a neglect of scientific principles and the substitution of comfortable and muddle-headed illusions for the facts which are the scientist’s stock-in-trade.

Scientists are now beginning to feel that they have something to give beyond their material contribution, something in the realm of values, of ideals, of human harmony and ordered social progress. This contribution has reference both to the war effort and to reconstruction—to the armed struggle in which we are now engaged, and to the prolonged and fateful struggle to which we are committed when the clash of arms has ceased.

How has it come about that the somewhat aloof soul of science has awakened to this new warmth of spiritual and social apostolicity? Much may no doubt be explained by a realisation of the social implications of recent advances in the so-called biological sciences. Ecology, biochemistry, nutritional science, economics, sociology, anthropology, psychology, educational science have all presented us with discoveries which clamour to be integrated into the social fabric as speedily as possible. Or again, it may be the contrast which the modern scientist finds between his work and his environment.

The Influence of Modern Biology

Modern Biology may be said to date from the publication of Darwin’s great work which resulted in a general acceptance of the belief in Organic Evolution, for not only has the bulk of thought and work in the biological field since then been at the very least strongly influenced by the ideas which were then let loose to develop and breed in every sphere of human activity, but the theory itself has been the actual stimulus behind an unparalleled outburst of biological investigations.

It is therefore of the utmost importance that we are clear at the outset on two fundamental points : (i) that Charles Darwin was bv no means the first to propound a theory of Organic Evolution, the success of his effort being due to (a) the mass of argument which he produced in support of his particular theory of Evolution, and (b) the time at which he made known his views—a time which happened to be favourable for their acceptance; and (2) the actual title of the book which produced such momentous results. It was The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection, or The Survival of the Fittest, and it was the suitability of the second title in particular which helped to make the theory so acceptable to the Liberal school of thought which was developing with the rise of industry and of wealthy industrialists concomitantly with the degradation of their employees to a status of virtual slavery. The theory was fortunate also in gaining as its fairy-godfather, T. H. Hiuxley, who not only made the idea of evolution acceptable to a vast number of readers and listeners, but who also introduced it into the fields of ethics and religion. In Germany, too, it found ardent supporters.

My part to-day is to show some of the practical consequences of the impact of science on society. To indicate results, however, without pointing out their causes would be of little value. I hope, therefore, that my colleagues in the papers introductory to these discussions will forgive me if I encroach a few steps on to the domain of principle, allotted to them, in developing my own domain of practice.

In three directions in particular has science exerted an important influence on society : in altering man’s mental outlook, in aiding his physical welfare, and in changing his environment. My comments will follow these paths.

Science and the Mental Outlook of Society.

The most important of the effects of science on the mind of the community, so it appears to me, has been through the example of single-minded search for truth which is the hallmark of all genuine scientific work. The truth to be attained may be limited to a particular plane, with a corresponding restriction in its range of influence ; but within that range the manner of the scientific worker’s approach to the unknown is outstandingly direct and fearless, animated solely by the desire for truth.

But that brings in its train a second reaction on the mental attitude of society. The course of a scientific enquiry would be sadly hampered if the heart were allowed to sway the head. The man of science has to keep his intellect at white heat, but his emotions in cold storage, till the end of his search, when certainly the feelings may be powerfully stirred in the arrival at a satisfying conclusion.