L56 INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF EDUCATION. 
tendency to omit all common elements, and undertake to train men on tueir differ- 
ances. The duties of men in society, in the home, in the state, in their religious rela- 
tions, are as important as the relations they sustain to one another as chemists, biolo- 
gists, as instructors in technical schools, or practicers of any other technical art, If 
this be so, then to begin by omitting all education of the general elements in humanity, 
and to lay out a line of instruction intended to develop only particular elements, in 
which each man may be superior to some of his fellows, is not an improvement in edu. 
ration. but a sort of return to barbarism. 
PRroressor SANFORD, of Stanford University, thought the whole question was whether 
we ought to train for symmetrical development or for effective development. A good 
deal could be said on the side of training a man where he will be worth more, instead 
of putting our application to develop powers he never had. It certainly makes a great 
lifference as to the effect of the work we do, whether we give him a chance to develop 
faculties he has, or whether we try to make a mathematician of one who has not the 
mathematical sense at all. We all know that most men arc weak in certain lines. 
There is some line in which they have no taste, and in which they cannot do anything. 
The result of years of training in mathematics may be such that some are heartily 
glad when they get through with it. When a man has studied anything four years 
and is glad to get through with it, it seems better for him never to have studied it at 
all. A study which will lead a man to dislike a subject, is a study that is bad. 
In regard to the dogmatic teaching of science, it would be hard to find a good pro- 
fessor of science who would maintain that the general principles of a science must 
first be taught dogmatically, and afterwards be proved by experiment. This is not 
the modern method. It is not the feeling of teachers of science. 
ON WHAT CONDITIONS SHOULD THE DEGREE OF 
DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY BE GIVEN? 
BY WILLIAM O. SPROULL, DEAN OF .THE UNIVERSITY OF CINCINNATI, 
OHIO. 
Or all literary degrees, that of Doctor of Philosophy carries with it the 
greatest weight. It is generally believed that the possessor thereof has 
done something to merit the distinction. On account of the importance 
which it bestows upon one, and on account of the vain custom now pre- 
vailing of addressing by the title Doctor those thus distinguished, many 
exert themselves to obtain this degree as quickly and as easily as possible. 
Unfortunately, there are institutions ready to meet this demand, which 
hy their charters are authorized to confer all academic degrees. Unless 
some check be applied, the degree of Ph.D. will become as common as 
some others, and those who are justly entitled thereto will be far outnum- 
oered by those who sought and obtained it in some expeditious way, 
solely for the purpose of gratifying their vanity. 
That this degree be not debased, two things are necessary: (1) That 
there be essential agreement as to the conditions on which it should be 
given ; and (2) that only such institutions confer this degree as are prop- 
arly manned and equipped. 
As to the conditions, it will be best to refer to those laid down by 
the universities of Germany. In general they are as follows: (1) The 
triennum ; 4.e., three years’ residence at German universities. (2) The 
preparation of a dissertation, involving original work, afterward to be 
printed. 
There 1 
tation if 
but the 
the can 
defend 1 
If Profi 
(April, 
universi 
haps th 
firms tl 
His wit 
end car 
followec 
into the 
him a 
was eng 
should 
follows, 
The can 
of two 3 
volving 
case pri 
acceptec 
to be co 
Two 
man tri 
of those 
dents ta 
althougl 
the lang 
than tw 
In the 
be print 
ought n 
college ¢ 
dissertal 
professo 
deposite. 
[nasmuc 
nents 11 
the num 
of Lette 
Sever