'Society has power to reforms a man'.elucidate.
Answers
Answer:
hi fine mark as brainleast and also don't forget to follow me
Explanation:
Abstract
SOME correspondence has recently appeared in the Morning Post under the title that stands at the head of this article. Lt.-Col. J. W. Barret, of the Australian Army, a Melbourne doctor, well known for his active participation in the educational world there, writing respectfully of British men of science, laments their exclusiveness. They are, he implies, too much dominated by the idea of studentship; they regard the sphere of science too much as that of the laboratory and the academy; they do not acknowledge brotherhood with men in the greater world, who, in the spirit of enterprise and with the kind of method that prevail in conventional science, are solving great problems of industry, commerce, and national development. Another writer goes further, and would hail as a brother in science the man who elucidates the authorship of Shakespeare's plays or the technique of an old master. It is not proposed here to enter upon a discussion of the legitimate use of the term science. We may be all for brotherhood, but the circumstances of life compel us largely to separate into groups for purposes of action, and there can be no real complaint if the word science is used in a restricted sense for what is perhaps better called natural science. This should not prevent men of science from recognising their kinship with all faithful workers for the elucidation of truth, in whatever sphere'of action. Let us avoid a controversy about mere words. “Lt.-Col. Barret's complaint is a more substantial one-not one of terminology. It is essentially ' this, that when operations relating to the forces of nature transcend a certain scale they are no longer recognised as science, and that men of science in the limited sense thus lose a great companionship and an invaluable link with the greater world. He gives as an illustration the work of a railroad president whose operations “involve the placing of towns and even cities in new positions, the reorganisation of the agricultural education of districts, the estimation of future markets, and other complicated actions involving scientific imagination of the first order.” It is probable that most men of science would; readily admit that some solid advantages would be gained by having in their camp these great operators, with all their intellectual energy, their enterprise and their influence, and perhaps many would admit their claim to inclusion. There is undoubtedly a tendency for an increased scale of operations to remove a man from the scientific class if he was once In it, or to prevent his accession if he did not originally enter through the usual portal. The case may be well illustrated from engineering. A scientifically trained engineer who betakes himself to great problems of engineering, constructing some almost impossible railway or irrigating a whole parched province of India, seems to be moving away from science. An engineer who has acquired such powers without having received the hall-mark of formal scien tific training, will find it hard to get his place acknowledged in the ranks of science. We may ask, What is really'at the bottom of this? Is it merely narrow-mindedness, or is there something more excusable? It is pleasant to think that there may be. Scientific men in their most august society are banded together “ for the improvement of natural knowledge.” They are by implication a body of students working in the temple of Nature for truth's sake alone, heedless of the world and its rewards. What they garner is their gift to the world: they fill another page in the Revelation that brings men nearer to the angels. Let a man wander into the world with his science as wares to sell for money profit, and he has passed from the true brotherhood. Surely this idea, perhaps here rather fancifully stated, is at the bottom of much of our exclusiveness. It is certainly expressed very often in the privacy of small deliberative councils and in personal intercourse, and it is strongly, though silently, operative in the outer world. If this were the chief reason for the detachment of men of science we should have to ask whether it be really good and sufficient. That it has elements of good in it, no one would deny. There should be much strength in the union of disinterested people, and the flame of disinterested-- that is, unworldly-study is the most sacred light of knowledge. But there is this great fact of history and actuality against an austere brotherhood: natural science has had its roots in the practical avocations of mankind,