It is desirable but not easy to find parallel illustrations of this
difference in attitude in other than psychological discussions; but
perhaps the following may be pertinent. If the widespread interest in
the North Pole were merely that in the possibility of its furnishing
the key to the mystery of the northward-turning magnet, and were at
once to disappear upon the removal of the mystery, such an interest
would be quite parallel to that of the "psychic researcher;" but the
interest of the true physicist in any physical phenomenon which in
the future may be demonstrated to exist at the North Pole would be a
persistent one, and one depending for its value on the illustration
thus revealed, not of mystery but of recognized physical principles.
Furthermore, be it observed that however valuable may be the physical
facts obtainable by a polar expedition, there is no overwhelming
obligation resting upon every physicist to desert his laboratory and
embark for the farthest north; but that such expeditions are decided
by considerations of general interest, expediency, and importance.
There is no obligation resting upon the physicist any more than
upon the psychologist to make large sacrifices for the pursuit of
ill-defined residual phenomena, and certainly not for the refutal of
far-fetched theories and suggested supernatural notions. Physicist
and psychologist alike contribute most to the advancement of their
science by an open-minded but systematic pursuit of definite,
significant, and logically fashioned problems.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account