The romantic history of science shows how the discoveries of the greatest human minds, slowly operating since the remotest times, have made possible our present-day civilization. Few studies are worthy of greater attention; no other department of knowledge affords more real pleasure. Whoever clearly understands the history of science possesses intellectual advantages over those who are ignorant of the causes that have led to the establishment of the basic principles of our modern industrial arts and applied sciences. Standards of comparison are furnished by the history of science which illuminate many of the wonders of to-day, develop alertness of mind, and afford a never-ending train of suggestions for thought. The term science means knowledge. It was derived from the language of the Romans. It is well to have a clear idea of the meaning of the word. Everyone knows that it has to do with certain kinds of knowledge; few know the particular kinds it embraces. It does not mean the mere knowledge of a single fact. It does not mean a knowledge of something which has to be done. Long before science was born, our early ancestors observed many isolated physical, philosophical, and religious facts. They knew that day followed night, that the stars moved, that every day the sun progressed over the arch of the heavens. Such facts did not constitute science. What we know as science began when man commenced to compare one fact with another, to classify phenomena, and to arrange his knowledge systematically. Order, method, system, are basic principles of science. The best description would, therefore, appear to be systematized knowledge of any kind which had been gained and verified by exact observation and correct thinking. The whole field of human knowledge is now methodically formulated and arranged into rational systems. Modern science may, therefore, be said to embrace all our exact knowledge. Its province is enormous; its subdivisions are limitless. Science takes no account of knowledge which is not exact. Many people acquire valuable information which they profitably use in business, but which they are unable to communicate or describe to others because they do not actually understand it. Farmers and flower growers often possess important practical knowledge of facts which are embraced by the principles of the sciences of agriculture, botany, and biology. But their practical knowledge is not true science. It is rather like an artist's intuitive impulse. It is not the result of scientific analysis, and there is no tangible, communicable residuum. There could be no science if men did not discover principles of knowledge which can be communicated to, and made available for use by others. Scientific knowledge must be stripped of all traces of emotionalism and personal convictions. True science is, therefore, depersonalized knowledge.