.
N HIS attitude toward present-day "Wonders of Science" the intelligently informed person is neither overcredulous nor ultrasceptical. While familiar with the spectacular successes of modern science and technology heis also aware of their limitations. He does not expect the problem of perpetual motion to be solved "any day now." On the other hand, with the clear fads of artificial transmutation before him, he is not ,upset by the apparent prospect of atomic power from uranium fission. Sound scientijic realism is one of the objectives of science education, and we are making some progress toward it. We must face the present course of world events with our customary, realistic habit of mind and training. The outlook is not a bright one, a t the moment of writing this, with the western Pacific area almost completely ovenun by the enemy. This can hardly be regarded with comphncy, but let us neither minimize the peril nor underestimate our capacity to meet it. We recently came across the following, in an editorial entitled "1942 Comes to America" in Food Materials and Equipment, which fits the situation completely:
I
"We have inherited power. But we have also inherited a tradition: a tradition of courage in the face of obstacles which often seemed insuperable; a tradition of accomplishing the impossible; a tradition of stubbornly refusiug to believe that 'it can't be done,' of looking constantly for neb methods, new knowledge, which makes it possible for us to say triumphantly. 'it can be donewe've done itl' "
Collectively, we have been accused of being apathetic about the war. But a peace-loving nation as large as ours cannot go on the warpath overnight. And we have already made considerable progress. In the beginning one frequently heard the remark: "The normal course of l i e and business shouldn't be interfered with any more than necessary." We don't hear this very often any more, fortunately; it is a sentiment which could defeat us. It is equivalent to saying that we should proceed with this war as slowly as possible. On the c o n t r q , we should be ready--even a n x i o u s to disrupt our normal lives entirely, in order to get on with this business and get it over with. Which brings us to the point. We have been receiving requests for enlightenment on the specificopportunities and duties of chemistry teachers a t the present time. "What can we do that will be of real and immediate help?" The educational literature is filling up with general answers to this question, appIying to all
ktnds of teachers. There is a feeling, however, that the science teacher has a rather particular problem. The burden can, of course, be put upon the individual to decide what contribution his particular training and ability best fit him to make, but something more s p e a c is needed. This we will hope to supply, from time to time, as suggestions come in to us. We are making a start in this direction in the article by A.M. Patterson this month. The science teacher shduld regard himself as particularly qnaliied to face the problems of this war, and by his attitude toward them should set an example to others. If teachers, scientists, and engineem cannot see their way clearly in a war which is so largely technological there is little hope for others to do so. It has become clearly evident that one of our biggest and most important problems is the survey and allocation of our available manpower. Where do we need to apply human efforts most urgently; how many men do we have who are able to do these things; how can we distribute these men most &ciently, so that each will be given a chance to do what he is best able to do? These are the most pressing questions. In order to stop the competition between various agencies and services for the limited number of available men it would seem necessaty to put the problem in the hands of a centralized agency of some sort, with power to make and enforce decisions. Meanwhile, and in addition to this administrative expedient, much can doubtless be done in a more decentralized manner to help solve the di5icnlty. There is something fundamental here. We are struggling to uphold the democratic ideal in an unsympathetic world. It is scarcely fitting that we should despair of a democratic solution of our own problems. A clear, public presentation of a di5iculty; a period of thought, discussion, and enlightenment; followed by a uystalliition of public opinion and determinationthis has been the democratic method. Perhaps it will avail us in the present emergency, if time isn't too short. There has been too much sitting back and waiting until "the Government tells us what to do." We need leadership, yes, badly. But let us not permit our wishful desire for it to blind us to our own responsibiiity in the solution of these problems. Our various organized groups, especially the educational agencies, by means of intelligent discussion and advice, can lay the groundwork of an enlightened public opinio; upon which, in the long rnn, any solution must be based.
