The Old Humanities and the New Science — Story, Setting & Ideas

(10 User reviews)   2805
In Category - Teaching Methods
Osler, William, Sir, 1849-1919, Cushing, Harvey, 1869-1939 [Author of introduction, etc.] Project Gutenberg 2015
Science; Classical education Readers of public-domain and historical texts
Project Gutenberg digital edition en

Edition facts

Words 15,317
Reading time 67 min
Text sections 2

The Old Humanities and the New Science — Story, Setting & Ideas can be approached with a clearer sense of reading commitment from its source measurements: 15,317 words, 1 hr 7 min estimated reading time, and 2 detected text sections.

The text analysis averages about 26.1 words per sentence, while the detected sections provide another way to judge how the source is divided.

Project Gutenberg metadata also associates the work with “Science,” connecting these edition facts with the source record’s subject description.

In his 1919 presidential address to the Classical Association, Sir William Osler argues that the humanities and sciences are complementary, not opposed, and critiques the narrow teaching of classical languages while advocating for a broader, more accessible humanistic education.
Share
Editorial Edition Score 4.5/5

Calculated from edition completeness, EPUB availability, text structure and catalogue metadata. Not a user rating.

How this score is calculated
  • Description quality20 pts
  • Title & short description10 pts
  • Source metadata20 pts
  • Text length15 pts
  • Chapters / structure15 pts
  • EPUB file integrity20 pts

Total of 100 points, scaled to a 2.5-5.0 range. Editions with an empty description or a missing EPUB file are not scored.

Edition quality

Read the Text

Asclepius was Apollo's chosen son, But to that son he never lent his bow, Nor did Hephæstus teach to forge his net; Both secrets hath Imperial Osler won. His winged words straight to their quarry go. All hearts are holden by his meshes yet. HARVEY CUSHING

_Brookline_ _February 18, 1920_

THE OLD HUMANITIES AND THE NEW SCIENCE

THE OLD HUMANITIES AND THE NEW SCIENCE

Early in the sixteenth century a literary joke sent inextinguishable laughter through the learned circles of Europe. The _Epistolæ Obscurorum Virorum_ is great literature, to which I refer for two reasons--its standard is an exact gauge of my scholarship, and had _Magister Nostrandus Ortuinus Gratius_ of Cologne, to whom most of the letters are addressed, been asked to join that wicked Erfurt Circle, he could not have been more surprised than I was to receive a gracious invitation to preside over this gathering of British scholars. I felt to have been sailing under false colours to have ever, by pen or tongue, suggested the possession of even the traditional small Latin and less Greek. Relieved by the assurance that in alternate years the qualification of your President was an interest in education and literature, I gladly accepted, not, however, without such anticipatory qualms as afflict an amateur at the thought of addressing a body of experts. Not an educated man in the Oxford sense, yet faint memories of the classics linger--the result of ten years of such study as lads of my generation pursued, memories best expressed in Tom Hood's lines:

"The weary tasks I used to con! The hopeless leaves I wept upon! Most fruitless leaves to me!"

In a life of teaching and practice, a mere picker-up of learning's crumbs is made to realize the value of the humanities in science not less than in general culture.

To have a Professor of Medicine in this Chair gives to the Oxford meeting an appropriate renaissance--shall we say mediæval?--flavour, and one may be pardoned the regret that the meeting is not being held in May, 1519, to have had the pleasure of listening to an address from a real Oxford scholar-physician, an early teacher of Greek in this University, and the founder of the Royal College of Physicians, whose _Rudimenta Grammatices_ and _De Emendata Structura Latini Sermonis_ upheld for a generation, on the Continent at least, the reputation of English scholarship. These noble walls, themselves an audience--indeed, most appreciative of audiences--have storied memories of Linacre's voice, and the basis of the keen judgment of Erasmus may have been formed by intercourse with him in this very school. In those happy days, to know Hippocrates and Galen was to know disease and to be qualified to practise; and my profession looks back in grateful admiration to such great medical humanists as Linacre and Caius and Rabelais. Nor can I claim to speak for pure science, some salt of which remains from early association, and from a lifelong attempt to correlate with art a science which makes medicine, I was going to say the only--but it is more civil to say the most--progressive of the learned professions.

To have lived right through an epoch, matched only by two in the story of the race, to have shared in its long struggle, to have witnessed its final victory (and in my own case, to be left I trust with wit enough to realize its significance)--to have done this has been a wonderful privilege. To have outgrown age-old theories of man and of nature, to have seen west separated from east in the tangled skein of human thought, to have lived in a world re-making--these are among the thrills and triumphs of the Victorian of my generation. To a childhood and youth came echoes of the controversy that Aristarchus began, Copernicus continued, and Darwin ended, that put the microcosm into line with the macrocosm, and for the golden age of Eden substituted the _tellus dura_ of Lucretius. Think of the Cimmerian darkness out of which our generation has, at any rate, blazed a path! Picture the mental state of a community which could produce "Omphalos: An Attempt to untie the Geological Knot"![1] I heard warm clerical discussions on its main thesis, that the fossils were put into the earth's strata to test men's faith in the Mosaic account of the creation, and our Professor of Natural Theology lectured seriously upon it! The intellectual unrest of those days wrapped many in that "dyvine cloude of unknowynge," by which happy phrase Brother Herp designates mediæval mysticism; and not a bad thing for a young man to live through, as sufficient infection usually remains to enable him to understand, if not to sympathize with, mental states alien or even hostile.

[1] By the distinguished naturalist Philip Henry Gosse.

An Age of Force followed the final subjugation of Nature. The dynamo replaced the steam-engine, radiant energy revealed the hidden secrets of matter, to the conquest of the earth was added the control of the air and the mastery of the deep. Nor was it only an Age of Force. Never before had man done so much for his brother, the victory over the powers of Nature meant also glorious victories of peace; pestilences were checked, the cry of the poor became articulate, and to help the life of the submerged half became a sacred duty of the other. How full we were of the pride of life! In 1910 at Edinburgh I ended an address on "Man's Redemption of Man" with the well-known lines of Shelley beginning, "Happiness and Science dawn though late upon the earth." And now, having survived the greatest war in history, and a great victory, with the wreckage of mediæval autonomy to clear up, our fears are lest we may fail to control the fretful forces of Caliban, and our hopes are to rebuild Jerusalem in this green and pleasant land.

Never before in its long evolution has the race realized its full capacity. Our fathers have told us, and we ourselves have known, of glorious sacrifices; but the past four years have exhausted in every direction the possibilities of human effort. And, as usual, among the nations the chief burden has fallen on that weary Titan, the Motherland,

"Bearing on shoulders immense, Atlantean, the load Well-nigh not to be borne Of the too vast orb of her fate."

Not alone did she furnish the sinews of war, but she developed a spirit that made defeat impossible.

No wonder war has advocates, to plead the heroic clash of ideals, the purging of a nation's dross in the fire of suffering and sacrifice, and the welding in one great purpose of a scattered people. Even Montaigne, sanest of men, called it "the greatest and most magnificent of human actions"; and the glamours of its pride, pomp, and circumstance still captivate. But there are other sides which we should face without shrinking. Why dwell on the horrors such as we doctors and nurses have had to see? Enough to say that war blasts the soul, and in this great conflict the finer sense of humanity has been shocked to paralysis by the helplessness of our civilization and the futility of our religion to stem a wave of primitive barbarism. Black as are the written and unwritten pages of history, the concentrated and prolonged martyrdom surpasses anything man has yet had to endure. What a shock to the proud and mealy-mouthed Victorian who had begun to trust that Love was creation's final law, forgetting that Egypt and Babylon are our contemporaries and of yesterday in comparison with the hundreds of thousands of years since the cave-dwellers left their records on walls and bones. In the mystic shadow of the Golden Bough, and swayed by the emotions of our savage ancestors, we stand aghast at the revelation of the depth and ferocity of primal passions which reveal the unchangeableness of human nature.

When the wild beast of Plato's dream becomes a waking reality, and a herd-emotion of hate sweeps a nation off its feet, the desolation that follows is wider than that in France and Belgium, wider even than the desolation of grief, and something worse--the hardened heart, the lie in the soul--so graphically described in Book II of the "Republic"--that forces us to do accursed things, and even to defend them! I refer to it because, as professors, we have been accused of sinning against the light. Of course we have. Over us, too, the wave swept, but I protest against the selection of us for special blame. The other day, in an address on "The Comradeship of Letters" at Turin, President Wilson is reported to have said: "It is one of the great griefs of this war that the universities of the Central Empires used the thoughts of science to destroy mankind; it is the duty of the universities of these states to redeem science from this disgrace and to show that the pulse of humanity beats in the classroom, and that there are sought out not the secrets of death but the secrets of life." A pious and worthy wish! But once in war a nation mobilizes every energy, and to say that science has been prostituted in discovering means of butchery is to misunderstand the situation. Slaughter, wholesale and unrestricted, is what is sought, and to accomplish this the discoveries of the sainted Faraday and of the gentle Dalton are utilized to the full, and to their several nations scientific men render this service freely, if not gladly. That the mental attitude engendered by science is apt to lead to a gross materialism is a vulgar error. Scientific men, in mufti or in uniform, are not more brutal than their fellows, and the utilization of their discoveries in warfare should not be a greater reproach to them than is our joyous acceptance of their success.

What a change of heart after the appalling experience of the first gassing in 1915! Nothing more piteously horrible than the sufferings of the victims has ever been seen in warfare.[2] Surely we could not sink to such barbarity! Is thy servant a dog? But martial expediency soon compelled the Allies to enlist the resources of chemistry; the instruction of our enemies was soon bettered, and before the Armistice there were developments in technique and destructive force that would have delighted Nisroch, who first invented aerial "machinations to plague the sons of men." A group of medical men representing the chief universities and medical bodies of the United Kingdom was innocent enough to suggest that such an unclean weapon--the use of lethal gases, "condemning its victims to death by long-drawn-out torture," and with infinite possibilities for its further development--should be forever abolished. "Steeped in folly by theories and prepossessions," failure to read the "lessons of war which should have sufficed to convince a beetle"--such were among the newspaper comments; and in other ways we were given to understand that our interference in such matters was most untimely. All the same, it is gratifying to see that the suggestion has been adopted at the Peace Congress.

[2] I am sorry to have seen Sargent's picture "Gassed" in this year's Academy. It haunts the mind like a nightmare.

With what a howl of righteous indignation the slaughter of our innocent women and children by the bombing of open towns was received! It was a dirty and bloody business, worthy of the Oxydracians by means of Levin-bolts and Thunders and more horrible, more frightful, more diabolical, maiming, breaking, tearing, and slaying more folk and confounding men's senses and throwing down more walls than would a hundred thunderbolts.[3]

[3] Rabelais, Book IV, ch. LXI.

Against reprisals there was at first a strong feeling. Early in 1916 I wrote to the "Times": "The cry for reprisals illustrates the exquisitely hellish state of mind into which war plunges even sensible men. Not a pacifist, but a 'last-ditcher,' yet I refuse to believe that as a nation, how bitter soever the provocation, we shall stain our hands in the blood of the innocent. In this matter let us be free from bloodguiltiness, and let not the undying reproach of humanity rest on us as on the Germans." Two years changed me into an ordinary barbarian. A detailed tally of civilians killed by our airmen has not, I believe, been published, but the total figures quoted are not far behind the German.

Could a poll have been taken a week before the Armistice as to the moral justification of the bombing of Berlin--for which we were ready--how we should have howled at the proposer of any doubt! And many Jonahs were displeased that a city greater than Nineveh, with more than the threescore and ten thousand who knew not the right hand from the left, had been spared. We may deplore the necessity and lament, as did a certain great personage:

"... Yet public reason just-- Honour and empire with revenge enlarged ... compels me now To do what else, though damned, I should abhor."

All the same, we considered ourselves "Christians of the best edition, all picked and culled," and the churches remained open, prayers rose to Jehovah, many of whose priests--even his bishops!--were in khaki, and quit themselves like men--yes, and scores died the death of heroes! Into such hells of inconsistency does war plunge the best of us!

Learning--new or old--seems a vain thing to save a nation, but possibly, as a set-off, science, as represented by cellulose and sulphuric acid, may yet prove the best bulwark of civilization! In his "History of the Origin of Medicine,"[4] Lettsom maintains that the invention of firearms has done more to prevent the destruction of the human species than any other discovery; he says: "Invention and discernment of mind have made it possible to reverse the ancient maxim that strength has always prevailed over wisdom." Science alone may prevent a repetition of the story of Egypt, of Babylonia, of Greece, and of Rome. The suggestion seems brazen effrontery when we have not even given the world the equivalent of the _Pax Romana_! Ah! what a picture of self-satisfied happiness in Plutarch! One envies that placid life in the midst of the only great peace the world has known, spanning a period of more than two hundred years. And he could say, "No tumults, no civil sedition, no tyrannies, no pestilences nor calamities depopulating Greece, no epidemic disease needing powerful and choice drugs and medicines"; though as a Delphic priest there is a pathetic lament that the Pythian priestess has now only commonplace questions to deal with.[5] Surely those cultivated men of his circle must have felt that their house could never be removed. Has Science reached such control over Nature that she will enable our civilization to escape the law of the Ephesian, written on all known records--_panta rei_? Perhaps so, now that material civilization is world-wide; cataclysmic forces, powerful enough in centres of origin, may weaken as they pass out in circles. Let this be our hope in the present crisis. At any rate, in the free democracies in which Demos with safety says "_L'État c'est moi_," it has yet to be determined whether Science, as the embodiment of a mechanical force, can rule without invoking ruin. Two things are clear: there must be a very different civilization or there will be no civilization at all; and the other is that neither the old religion combined with the old learning, nor both with the new science, suffice to save a nation bent on self-destruction. The suicide of Germany, the outstanding fact of the war, followed an outburst of national megalomania. For she had religion--it may shock some of you to hear! I mean the people, not the writers or the thinkers, but the people for whom Luther lived and Huss died. Of the two devotional ceremonies which stand supreme in my memory, one was a service in the Dom, Berlin, in which "not the great nor well bespoke, but the mere uncounted folk" sang Luther's great hymn "_Ein' feste Burg ist unser Gott._"[6] With the Humanities Germany never broke, and the proportion of students in her schools and universities who studied Greek and Latin has been higher than in any other country. You know better than I the innumerable classical studies of her scholars. In classical learning relating to science and medicine she simply had the field; for one scholar in other countries she had a dozen, and the monopoly of journals relating to the history of these subjects. And she had science, and led the world in the application of the products of the laboratory to the uses of every-day life--in commerce, in the arts, and in war. Withal, like Jeshurun, she waxed fat; and did ever such pride go before such destruction? What a tragedy that the successors of Virchow and Traube and Helmholtz and Billroth should have made her a byword among the nations! "Lilies that fester smell far worse than weeds!"

[5] "Why the Pythian Priestess," etc. (Plutarch's _Morals_, vol. III, p. 100, Goodwin's edition).

[6] And the other, how different! The crowded Blue Mosque of Cairo, and the crowded streets with the thousands of kneeling Moslems awaiting the cry of the muezzin from the tower.

So much preliminary to the business before us, to meet changed conditions as practical men, with the reinforcement born of hope or with the strong resolution of despair.

For what does this Association stand? What are these classical interests that you represent? Take a familiar simile. By a very simple trick, you remember, did Empedocles give Menippus in the moon-halt--the first stage of his memorable trip--such long and clear vision that he saw the tribes of men like a nest of ants, a seething mass going to and fro at their different tasks. Of the function of the classical members in this myrmecic community there can be no question. Neither warriors, nor slaves, nor neuters, you live in a well-protected social environment, heretofore free from enemies, and have been well taken care of. I hate to speak of you as larvæ, but as such you perform a duty of the greatest import in this trophidium stage of your existence. Let me explain. From earliest days much attention has been paid by naturalists to the incredible affection "--incredible [Greek: storgê]," Swammerdam calls it--which ants display in feeding, licking, and attending the larvæ. Disturb a nest, and the chief care is to take them to a place of safety. This attention is what our symphilic community--to use a biological term--bestows on you. So intensely altruistic, apparently, is this behaviour, that for the very word "[Greek: storgê]," which expresses the tenderest of all feelings, there is a difficulty in finding an equivalent; indeed, Gilbert White used it almost as an English word. The truth is really very different.

It has been shown that the nursing function--or instinct--is really trophallactic. In the case of the ant the nurse places the larva on its back, and the broad ventral surface serves as a trough for the food, often predigested. The skill and devotion with which this is done are among the wonders in the life of the insect to which moralists have never tired of urging a visit. But listen to the sequel! The larva is provided with a pair of rich honey-bags in the shape of salivary glands, big exudatoria from which is discharged an ambrosia greedily lapped up by the nurse, who with this considers herself well paid for her care. In the same manner, when the assiduous V.A.D. wasp distributes food to the larvæ, the heads of which eagerly protrude from their cells, she must be paid by a draught of nectar from their exudatoria, while if it is not forthcoming the wasp seizes the head of the larva in her mandibles and jams it back into its cell and compels it to pay up. The lazy males will play the same game and even steal the much-sought liquid without any compensatory gift of nourishment.[7]

[7] Professor Wheeler in _Proceedings of Amer. Phil. Soc._, vol. LVII, no. 4, 1918.

Sir William Osler, a physician and scientist, was an unusual choice to preside over the Classical Association in 1919. His address, reprinted here with an introduction by Harvey Cushing, directly confronts the perceived divide between the old humanities and the new science. Osler does not defend the classics by rote; instead, he questions the methods by which they are taught, calling the traditional grammar-heavy approach a 'pernicious method' that obscures the beauty of ancient literatures. He speaks as an outsider—'a fool among the wise'—yet his authority rests on a lifelong engagement with humanist texts, counting Plutarch and Montaigne among his 'best friends.'

A Scientist Among Classicists

Osler opens by acknowledging the strangeness of his position: a medical man addressing an association devoted to Latin and Greek. He notes that his predecessor, a Professor of Greek, had set a precedent for alternating between classicists and outsiders. Osler’s own claim to the role rests not on philological expertise but on a broader humanism—'a student of human affairs and human nature.' He positions himself as an advocate for the 'average man,' not the specialized scholar. This rhetorical stance allows him to critique classical education from within, using the language of a sympathetic but critical friend. He praises the ideal of producing scholars like Ingram Bywater but questions the cost: 'a holocaust of undergraduates every year.' The metaphor is deliberately provocative, suggesting that the current system sacrifices many for the sake of a few.

The Grammar Grudge

Osler reserves his sharpest criticism for the teaching of grammar. He declares a 'medullary prejudice' against grammar, blaming Protagoras for its invention. This is not mere whimsy; it reflects a deeper argument about how languages should be taught. He cites Montaigne, Milton, and Locke as advocates of a more practical method: 'Make the language an instrument to play with and to play with thoroughly.' The goal, he insists, should be fluency and appreciation, not dissection. He quotes approvingly a Greek Curriculum Committee that believes 'it is possible in a comparatively short time to acquire a really valuable knowledge of Greek.' Osler’s own medical background informs his language: he speaks of 'dissecting the neuro-muscular mechanism' of language, a metaphor that blends his two worlds. The tone is conversational, even irreverent, as he takes aim at sacred cows of classical pedagogy.

The Unhappy Divorce

Osler’s central thesis is that the humanities and sciences are 'twin berries on one stem,' artificially separated to the detriment of both. He paraphrases Mark Twain on Christian Science to coin a memorable formulation: 'the so-called Humanists have not enough Science, and Science sadly lacks the Humanities.' The address references two official reports edited by Sir Frederic Kenyon that had recently 'stirred the pool' of educational debate. Osler welcomes these reports as signs of 'constructive, anabolic action'—a term from physiology that underscores his scientific perspective. He argues that the exclusion of modern scientific developments from the classical curriculum is a grave omission: 'the moving forces which have made the modern world are simply ignored.' The School of Literae Humaniores, he notes with 'gasping astonishment,' makes no room for these forces, despite their Hellenic origins.

A Plea for the Average Man

Throughout the address, Osler distinguishes between the elite scholar and the ordinary student. The current system, he argues, serves only the few who will go on to 'Mods' and 'Greats.' For the rest, the goal should be to 'infect with the spirit of the Humanities'—a phrase that echoes his medical background. He calls this 'the greatest single gift in education.' Osler’s own reading habits model this ideal: he describes his breviary as 'Plutarch gallicized by Montaigne,' a hybrid text that crosses linguistic and cultural boundaries. He does not propose abolishing classical languages but reforming their teaching to emphasize literature over grammar. The address is thus a practical intervention in a live educational debate, grounded in Osler’s experience as both a scientist and a lifelong reader of the classics.

Osler’s address is best read as a personal manifesto rather than a systematic treatise. His arguments are woven from anecdote, metaphor, and direct address, reflecting the oral occasion. Readers interested in the history of education will find a vivid snapshot of post-World War I debates about curriculum. Those drawn to Osler’s own voice will appreciate his wit and his ability to bridge two cultures. The text rewards attention to its rhetorical strategies—the way Osler positions himself as an amateur among experts, the medical metaphors that color his critique, and the specific authors he invokes as models.

Reading Osler’s gentle plea for a wider, kinder kind of learning, I was reminded of the stubborn quiet at the heart of another story. He spoke of education as a living thing, not a set of rules. That feeling lingered—and then I thought of how some lessons are only ever truly learned through patient refusal, like in The Burston School Strike — Themes and Context. Both carry that same soft, stubborn hope.

Ava Hill
1 week ago

Wyatt Mitchell
3 weeks ago

Isaac Miller
2 weeks ago

Benjamin Roberts
2 weeks ago

Samuel Lopez
1 week ago

4.5
4.5 out of 5 (10 User reviews )

Add a Review

Your Rating *
There are no comments for this eBook.

Reader reflection

How will you remember this book?

Save your reaction, strongest insight, and memorable passage.

Your progress 0 / 10
1

How far have you progressed with this book?

2

Was reading this book enjoyable?

3

How likely are you to recommend this book?

4

How much effort did this book require?

Related eBooks