of body and mind; the other affords the environment amidst which the growth takes place, by which natural tendencies may be strengthened or thwarted, or wholly new ones implanted. Neither of the terms implies any theory; natural gifts may or may not be hereditary; nurture does not especially consist of food, clothing, education or tradition, but it includes all these and similar influences whether known or unknown.

44. Nature and Nurture

[CLARKE, E. L., American Men of Letters, pp. 91-93. Longmans, Green & Co., 1916.]

New York,

It does not appear to be proved that a good environment will make a genius of nearly every one. . . . Vast numbers of persons who enjoy every opportunity never rise beyond mediocrity. This fact seems so obvious as to need no further comment.

In the second place, many persons achieve success when every environmental condition seems unfavorable. Apparently this fact indicates that some persons possess greater power of overcoming difficulties than do others.

In the third place, there seems to be positive evidence. that genius is not "scattered somewhat uniformly through the whole mass of the population."

Such family names as Adams, Abbot, Beecher, Edwards and Everett are conspicuous in the history of American letters. In all sixty-eight families furnished one hundred and fifty-eight of the thousand men of letters. . . . There were only thirteen literati born per million of the general population, while forty-five literary sons and daughters were born in a group of one thousand men and women of letters.

45. Factors of Man-Making

[HORNE, H. H., Idealism in Education, pp. 1, 5–6, 140–141. Copyright, 1910, by the Macmillan Co. Reprinted by permission.]

The making of men and women,-this is the occupation of the ages. The world has been busy these aeons in bringing forth a man. . . . We are able to assert that man is what the labor of the heavens and the earth has brought forth. He stands at the summit of the evolutionary process as so far unfolded. . . . But what are the forces that make men and women? ... Heredity, environment, and will are the names by which we call the elements that in their mixing make men and women. Heredity

bestows capacity, unchangeable in the individual, but subject to improvement in the race by the right selection of life-partners. Environment provides opportunity. Will by effort realizes the inherited capacity and utilizes the environing opportunity.

46. The Factors Involved in Man-Making

[THORNDIKE, E. L., Educational Psychology, Vol. 1, pp. 2-4. New York. Teachers College, Columbia University, 1914.]

What a man is and does throughout life is a result of whatever constitution he has at the start and of all the forces that act upon it before and after birth. . . . The basis of intellect and character is (this) fund of unlearned tendencies. . . . They are the starting point for all education. . . . The aim of education is to perpetuate some of them, to eliminate some, and to modify or redirect others. They are perpetuated by providing the stimuli adequate to arouse them and give them exercise, and by associating satisfaction with their action. They are redirected by substituting . . . another response instead of the undesirable original one; or by attaching the response to another situation in connection with which it works less or no harm, or even positive good.

47. Heredity and Environment

[From Being Well-Born, by M. F. GUYER, p. 295. Copyright, 1920. Used by special permission of the publishers, the Bobbs-Merrill Co.]

To wrangle over the question of which is more important, heredity or environment, is about as idle a proceeding as to argue which is more important, the stomach or something to put in the stomach. Man would soon come to grief without either. So, too, the question of human development is not one of heredity alone nor of environment alone; both are necessary and must work hand in hand.

48. Those Who Become Famous

[WOODS, Erville B., "Heredity and Opportunity," American Journal of Sociology, September, 1920, Vol. 26, p. 161.]

If one were disposed to make comparisons it would appear, e.g., that if one of two brothers should engage in farming or dairying, while the other became a newspaper man, the chances of the former's appearing in Who's Who in comparison with

those of the latter would be as 1 to 5,380. A banker has one chance to thirty-nine enjoyed by a writer. A physician is from a fourth to a fifth as likely to be "conspicuously successful" as a newspaper man. Even the lawyers and judges have but one chance in thirteen of getting into the Hall of Fame when pitted against the authors.

QUESTIONS AND PROBLEMS

1. What great moral principle is inherent in evolution?

2. What a man is and does throughout life is a result of several forces. What are these forces?

3. Define heredity. What traits are inheritable?

4. How would one not believing in innate racial differences account for the traits of the American Negro?

5. Of what significance is Mendel's Law for students of education?

6. Contrast physical heredity with social heredity. Why do human beings progress faster than brutes?

7. What important suggestions concerning education are offered by Dr. H. S. Jennings, the noted biologist?

8. How may a dynamic knowledge of the original nature of man enable the teacher to do more artistic teaching? How would a knowledge of the principles of social psychology help her?

9. How did Mendel proceed in his experimentation with peas in order to get a hybrid?

10. State Mendel's Law as it applies to offspring. Illustrate. 11. Give illustrations of the working of Mendel's Law with reference to pigeons, corn, and the like.

12. Some member of the class may be able to undertake to demon strate Mendel's Law by crossing some animals or plants.

13. What people become famous? Why?

14. What is the significance of the law of exercise?

15. Illustrate clearly the meaning of social heredity.

16. Why should society be familiar with eugenic suggestions based upon Mendelian inheritance?

17. How does Galton distinguish heredity from environment? 18. Explain fully what Thorndike means by original nature. What is included in our native equipment?

19. Why is so much emphasis placed on child life and its environment?

20. What are some of the possible causes of apparent racial dif、 ferences in general mental ability?

REFERENCES

BOLTON, F. E., Everyday Psychology for Teachers (New York, Charles Scribner's Sons, 1923), Chaps. v, vi.

BURT, Cyril, The Young Delinquent (New York, D. Appleton & Co., 1925), Chaps. ii, iii.

CASTLE, W. E., Heredity (New York, D. Appleton & Co., 1911). CHAPIN, H. D., Heredity and Child Culture (New York, E. P. Dutton & Co., 1922).

CONKLIN, E. G., Heredity and Environment in the Development of Men (Princeton, Princeton University Press, 1916).

DOWNING, E. R., The Third and Fourth Generation (Chicago, University of Chicago Press, 1918).

ESTABROOK, A. H., The Jukes in 1915 (Carnegie Institution of Washington, 1916).

GALTON, Francis, Hereditary Genius (New York, Macmillan Co., 1914).

GODDARD, H. H., Feeble-Mindedness; Its Causes and Consequences (New York, Macmillan Co., 1914).

PETERS, C. C., Foundations of Educational Sociology (New York, Macmillan Co., 1924), pp. 173–183.

SALEEBY, C. W., Parenthood and Race Culture (Boston, Moffatt, Yard & Co., 1909).

THOMSON, J. A., What Is Man? (New York, G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1924).

TREDGOLD, A. F., Mental Deficiency (New York, William Wood &

Co., 1912).

WIGGAM, A. E., The Fruit of the Family Tree (Indianapolis, BobbsMerrill Co., 1924).

CHAPTER V

INTELLIGENCE

The present meaning of general intelligence has had a gradual growth. The psychologist borrowed from everyday life a term implying all-around ability and in the process of trying to measure this trait he is forced to define it more sharply and give it a more scientific connotation.

In the writings of Binet we do not find any well-formulated definition of general intelligence. For a long time he seems not clearly to differentiate intelligence from knowledge. Later, practical work with the scale made differentiation necessary.

While it has not seemed pertinent that we have exact knowledge of the general nature of intelligence, a preliminary definition neither too broad nor too narrow is essential. The German psychologist, William Stern, has given us a short definition of general intelligence very commonly accepted. "Intelligence is a general capacity of an individual consciously to adjust his thinking to new requirements: it is general mental adaptability to new problems and conditions of life." Stern thus differentiates general intelligence from talent which is the development of a specific ability; from knowledge which is mere information; and from memory which deals with the old but reinstated experiences, while intelligence is directed toward new problems and conditions. Stern's statements are often further contracted as follows: "General intelligence is the ability of the organism to adjust itself adequately to new situations."

1

The general intelligence level of a child can be discovered by the time he enters school. That level for practical purposes remains fairly constant (17,20,29). The training provided for each individual should be determined therefore by

1 Stern, William, The Psychological Methods of Testing Intelligence (Baltimore, Warwick & York, 1914), p. 3.