The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is in corporated the West Coast Times TUESDAY,. SEPTEMBER 22, 1931. SCIENCE OM MODERN POLITICS.

Hokitika Guardian, 22 September 1931, Page 4

The Guardian And Evening Star, with which is in corporated the West Coast Times TUESDAY,. SEPTEMBER 22, 1931. SCIENCE OM MODERN POLITICS.

In the course of a lecture on “The Pole of Science in Modern Politics,” delivered at Christchurch, recently, Dr. 0. G. Frankel of Canterbury Agricultural College said material progress was very slow in ‘the 2000 years which preceded the scientific developments of the last 100 years as compared with the vast progress in this last period. We have witnessed and are witnessing, a gigantic increase in knowledge; it is difficult to foresee the limits. Science, he continued, liad advanced very successfully, in material achievements, but it had so far been utterly unsuccessful in dealing with the superstructure of human institutions and relations. Progress in the fundamentals of political methods was practically negligible; elections were still held practically as they were hundreds of years ago; a minority still controlled the affairs, particularly the foreign affairs, of a country, while the masses had very little real say. Our national 'and international institutions were in principle largely the same as those of (iur forefathers, Whereas rational methods had been used in dealing with the scientific and technical branches of development the same could mot be said of our knowledge of national government and international relations. Unemployment, trade depressions, defective distribution of goods and credits, racial disputes, national disputes. wars—lvue of these problems is met by rational treatment. It must be admitt'-d that the s e problems are of a mns*iitnde widely surpassing that of nnv single problematic aspect of human thought, but on the other hand we ear be firm in asserting that much less investigational, rational effort has been spent on them than on far more remote technical or scientific prob-

Terns. The superstructure of our institutions, he said, was bamd cn the standout of the majority. Just as pioneers in science, suoa as Newton, Galileo, and Mendel, were often ahead of their time, and not understood by their contemporaries so political reason, •ers could be far ahead of theins.. The leading thinkers of our time had ideas on a rationalisation l of the • superstructure, but we were not prepared to accept thorn. Our psychology in na ti onal and iinei national affairs was not up to the ’intellectual standard of our achievements in general knowledge. We were hesitating to make the deciding step from, the caveman’s existence to that of the rational being. What is most lacking in our minds, is a. faculty for critical discrimination. A small minority only are relatively capable of forming ideas of their own. What is needed foi; the remaining majority is a power, of independent judgment. At present the standards of values are fixed, in our minds at an

early age, and all' forces of public r,pillion co operate to standardise our ideas and to kill our natural gifts for discrimination. It is certainly easier to govern an obedient crowd tlmit in* dividuats with/an individual judgment. It would be necessary for a scientific method to be devised to ensure -the education of the governors of -a country, Dr. Frankrl continued. In a world of specialisation it was an anomaly that it should he unnecessary for the elected rulers to he ex.po’ts in any branch of kovledge at all.-