brain cells, through the medium of the optic nerve, and for the variation in the intensity of the sensation as the accompaniment of the variation in the intensity of the stimulation; it can account for the consciousness of a purpose as the accompaniment of a check in some habitual reaction to stimuli. We can find here an analogy between the way of controlling the feelings and ideas of a man and the way of controlling the music of a piano. The music itself is intangible, but accompanies the vibrations of the strings, which can be controlled by means of the physical keys. So with the intangible ideas and feelings of a man; they accompany the brain processes which can be controlled by means of the physical sense organs.

Although a natural science must logically explain mental changes indirectly through explaining physical changes in the brain, these physical changes need not be known directly through microscopic or other examination. It may be assumed that the changes which cannot be observed are like those which, in the physical world, take place on so large a scale that they can be observed. Natural science often makes use of such analogies where direct observation fails. Nobody, for instance, ever saw an atom or a molecule, but explanations of chemistry are, with scientific accuracy, based upon the actions of these analogical constructs. Nobody ever saw ether, but this does not in the least interfere with the value of the physicist's explanation of the transmission of light. Other kinds of waves have been seen, and the ether waves may be imagined to be like these. So in the explanation of the physical counterparts of mental facts, the natural scientist may assume that the changes, where he cannot see them, resemble those which he has seen elsewhere in the physical world; and thus, if his assumptions are

consistent with the facts so far as the facts are known, he may rest assured that in making these assumptions he has not compromised the dignity of natural science.

When the ideas and feelings of the mental world are accounted for materialistically as the associates, or parallels, of changes in the physical brain, sensations are explained as the accompaniments of brain changes started by physical action upon the in-going nerves; original desires are viewed as the accompaniments of checks in the expressions of instincts, or inborn nervous connections, created through a long process of interaction between organisms and environment, and conserved by heredity; and acquired desires are similarly explained as the accompaniments of checks in the functioning of nervous connections made, according to the laws of habit formation, in the lifetime of the organism. So, too, a vivid memory of an experience is accounted for as going hand in hand with a deep impression upon the brain; the association of ideas is regarded as the parallel of a path in the brain; and the emotions are explained as due to bodily conditions affecting the brain through the nervous system. The meanings of ideas are likewise said to be the parallels of brain changes produced by reaction in the adjustment of the physical body to its environment; growth of mental life is considered the accompaniment of changes in the brain resulting from continued interaction of organism and environment through stimuli and responses; and the fact that one can learn more easily in youth than in old age is attributed to the plasticity of the brain during youth. Thus is natural law made to rule in the spiritual world, to the end that man may get scientific control of his thoughts and feelings, and in this way control the behavior which they indicate.

IV

Teleologically man is regarded as a person controlled by pur-
poses and ideas, the mind thus appearing to be master of the body.
Purposes and ideas are directly interconnected through final causa-
tion by bonds of meaning.

When man is regarded as an essentially spiritual being, his conduct is no longer the result of blind force exerted through physical interaction which modifies the brain, but is rather the result of purposes which he has in mind and ideas which guide him in carrying out these purposes. In order to explain his action, we seek to find what he is trying to do and how he is trying to do it. We acknowledge him to be a person having inner experiences, and seek to understand his actions by reproducing in our imagination his feelings and thoughts, his purposes and ideas. The physical body is not regarded as the basis for describing and explaining his thoughts and feelings, but as an instrument under the control of his mind and used by his mind to accomplish its purposes. Instead of being master of the spiritual life, the body now becomes its servant.

Here, from this point of view, to be sure, purposes and ideas are considered the causes of action. A man's purpose to write a letter is the cause for his walking to the typewriter; his idea that oil makes a machine run more easily is the cause for his putting oil on the bearings. These causes are not, however, the kind recognized by natural science. In the case of natural science, the cause, which is physical, is a real thing preceding an effect. A billiard ball, for instance, must move before by impact it can move another ball. This kind of cause is called efficient. In the case of teleological explanations, where purposes and ideas are said to be the causes, the cause is

not a real thing until the effect is complete, until the end of the action. For this reason it is called a final cause. A man, for example, is running towards a moving car. What makes him run is the purpose of getting a seat in the car and the idea that he can do this by running, but he does not get the seat until the running is ended. In accounting from the teleological point of view for the appearance of purposes and ideas, no reference whatever to their physical counterparts in the brain is needed; they are interconnected and controlled by meanings which we can directly experience when they appear in our consciousness. This is the common way of regarding persons in our daily relations with them. With no thought of brain changes, we can reproduce in our imagination and thereby directly understand and appreciate the man's purpose of getting a seat in the moving car, and we can understand in connection with this purpose the meaning of the man's running.

V

In order to take advantage of the stronger features of both materialistic and teleological points of view, in reducing the principles of education to a single basis for organization, principles derived from natural science, which within certain limitations is more accurate and authoritative, should be translated into the more familiar and more easily understood terms of teleology.

The two general ways in which human life is viewed have now been set forth. One uses as the basis for its explanations blind force transmitted through physical interaction, or, in other words, efficient causation; the other uses as the basis for its explanations purposes to be attained, or, in other words, final causation. The vistas of causation revealed from these two general points of

view lie in opposite directions. The one looks towards the past, retracing the chain of physical cause and effect until it is led ultimately to the forces emanating from primeval chaos; the other looks towards the future, accounting for each purpose by one farther ahead, until it is led ultimately in the explanation of things to that "one, far-off, divine event to which the whole creation moves." Our next problem is to find how these two general points of view may be related so that the principles of education learned from the various special studies which represent them may be unified.

Since only the realm of mind and the realm of matter are known,1 the idealistic and the materialistic are the only points of view which studies of human life may take; there is no other point of view which includes the two and could bear the burden of reconciliation. The problem of reconciliation becomes, therefore, the problem of translating truths learned from one of these points of view into the terms of the other. In undertaking this task, the first question that arises is: Into which set of terms, the materialistic or the teleological, should the translation be made and the educational principles collected for organization?

In the statements of the principles of education, as an examination of textbooks in this subject reveals, a decided preference has been shown for the language and technique of natural science. This preference has been shown because natural science speaks with accuracy and authority. It can speak thus, because the things with which it deals, stimuli and reactions through the medium

1 For those interested in metaphysics, it may be said that this statement is not intended to imply metaphysical dualism, since mind and matter are mere abstractions from a unitary experience.