[153] Dr. Otto Grosser—The structure of the female body in “Man and Woman.” Stuttgart, 1907.
[155] Raymond Pearl—Variation or Correlation in Brainweight. Biometrika, vol. IV. June, 1905.
[156] W. Duckworth—Morphology and Anthropology. Cambridge, 1904.
[157] Kohlbruegge—Investigations of the furrows of the brain of human races. Journal of Morphology and Anthropology. Stuttgart, 1908.
[158] L. Stieda—The Brain of the Philologist. Journal of Morphology and Anthropology, 1907.
[160] K. Pearson—Variation in Man and Woman in Chances of Death. London, 1897.
[4.—Darwinism and the Condition of Society.]
It has accordingly not been proven, that women are inferior to men as a result of the quantity of their brain; yet the present intellectual status of women is not surprising. Darwin is surely right in saying, that if a list of the ablest men on the subjects of poetry, painting, sculpture, music, science and philosophy were placed beside a list of the ablest women on the same subjects, the two could not compare with one another. But could it be otherwise? It would be surprising if it were not so. Very correctly Dr. Dodel (Zurich)[161] says, that it would be different if for a number of generations men and women would be similarly educated. As a rule, woman is physically weaker than man also, which is by no means the case among many uncivilized peoples.[162] How much can be attained by practice and training from childhood on, may, for instance, be seen with ladies of the circus and female acrobats, who achieve most astounding things in regard to courage, daring, skill and strength.
As all these things are conditioned by the mode of life and education, as they are—to use a scientific term—due to “breeding,” it may be assumed as certain that the physical and intellectual life of man will lead to the best results, as soon as man will consciously and expediently influence his development.