How to Study

by George Fillmore Swain

(c) THE STUDENT'S MIND SHOULD BE A CONTINUAL INTERROGATION POINT.[[1]]—He should always ask himself, regarding any statement which he reads, whether there is a reason for it, and if there is, whether it is inherent in the nature of things, so that he might independently arrive at it, or whether it follows from facts which the writer has observed. For instance, there is at first sight no reason why a cubic foot of water should weigh 62.4 pounds. It simply does and that is all there is to it; it does, because it does. But if he reads that a cubic foot of water at one point on the earth's surface weighs less than it does at another point, or that in the Northern Hemisphere the wind in a storm revolves around the storm center in a direction contrary to the motion of the hands of a clock, he should perceive that these facts, if true, have a reason for them, and he should endeavor to perceive that reason.

It must be observed at this point that, strictly speaking, there must be a reason for any truth, even for what we may term mere facts, excepting those which are mere definitions. There is some reason, lying in the constitution and arrangement of its atoms, why a cubic foot of water at a given spot and at a given temperature weighs 62.4 pounds. But there is no reason why New York is 90 miles from Philadelphia; those two points 90 miles apart are simply so named or defined. Many truths which are accepted as mere facts, the explanation being unknown, in the course of time are explained by the progress of science. Thus, for many years the fact that a magnetic needle pointed toward the North was a mere unexplained fact, but later the reason was discovered. The same is true of the fact that the pollution of drinking water by sewage may cause typhoid fever. The point is that the student must continually discriminate, continually inquire, and, as he reads, keep a list of points, the reason for which he cannot then discover, but which he perceives must have a discoverable reason. He should not go too deeply into this, but should preserve his sense of proportion; for if he follows every possible line of inquiry back to its source he will progress but slowly. Thus, if he is studying descriptive astronomy and reads that the sun is ninety-two million miles from the earth, or that Jupiter has nine moons, or that the star Sirius is moving away from the earth with a velocity of eleven miles per second, or that the moon always turns the same half toward the earth, he should perceive that he cannot at that stage try to get back of these facts, but he may well make a note of them as questions to be later examined, if not as to the cause, at least as to how the fact is ascertained.

It does not follow that he should never leave the subject until he has found a reason, for it may depend upon facts or principles of which he is not at the moment informed; but if such is the case, he should accept the fact tentatively, but make a mental note that it is something which clearly must have a reason which he is capable of perceiving, and which he will look up at some future time. In studying his book he may well make a list of such questions to ask the teacher or to look up later.

Students must of course proceed in a systematic way, and a student who has not studied physics cannot be expected to perceive reasons that depend upon the laws of physics, and yet without a knowledge of physics he may still perceive that a statement is not of a mere fact, but of something that must have a reason. To primitive peoples nature was a closed book. The simplest phenomena were beyond their understanding, and they, therefore, imagined deities of whose personal activities these phenomena were supposed to be manifestations. With the progress of science many phenomena once mysterious and looked upon as facts have become easily explained. The intelligent student, however, can generally distinguish between statements of the different kinds which have been described, and he should constantly endeavor to explain or seek the reason for new statements by relating them to the body of knowledge which he has previously gained. Unfortunately, the average student reads only to accept what is written, whether fact, conclusion, or opinion, perhaps memorizing it verbatim under the impression that by so doing he is learning; he does not examine or reflect upon it, and often even accepts as facts what are explicitly stated to be mere expressions of opinion. Thus palpable mistakes, or even typographical errors, which a careful student should detect at once, are often accepted and believed. It is for this reason that it is so easy to deceive most people, at least for part of the time. They do not think for themselves, and all that is necessary to make them believe what you say is in some way to get them to think you are an authority.

(d) REGARDING FACTS WHICH HE DOES NOT THEN INVESTIGATE THE REASON FOR, HE SHOULD ASK How THEY ARE ASCERTAINED.—This will draw his attention to methods of observation and experiment, or to the technique of the subject. How, for instance, is it ascertained that New York is 90 miles from Philadelphia, or that the sun is ninety-two million miles from the earth? It is always possible to ascertain, at least in a general way, how a fact is ascertained, though it may not be possible to determine the reason for the fact. This applies not alone to physical sciences, but to questions of an economic, historic or sociological character. If we read that at the Battle of Gettysburg 3072 Union soldiers were killed, we do not inquire why; such a question is clearly meaningless; but we may well inquire how this was ascertained, whether by counting the dead upon the field or by the roll call, etc.; or if we read that following the issue of large quantities of paper currency during the Civil War, the amount of gold in the country decreased, we may in this case also inquire how it was ascertained, and we may further perceive that this is a fact for which there must be a reason, and we may then or later ascertain why it is true.

(e) THE STUDENT MUST TRAIN HIMSELF TO BE CONSTANTLY ON THE WATCH FOR EVIDENCE OF RELIABILITY IN THE WRITER HE IS STUDYING, IN ORDER THAT HE MAY GET A CORRECT IMPRESSION AS TO WHETHER HIS STATEMENTS OF FACT MAY BE ACCEPTED, AS WELL AS HIS CONCLUSIONS AND OPINIONS.—Many writers are careless, some are entirely unreliable, and some wilfully distort. Not only are the opinions sometimes expressed entirely unwarranted by the facts, but often statements of mere fact, such as those of statistics, may be grossly perverted, sometimes intentionally. Erroneous conclusions or opinions which are the result of illogical reasoning from correct facts may be discovered by the student who himself knows how to reason, but perversions of fact may escape detection, if not traced back to original authorities or observations, which the student may not have time or opportunity to do. Statistical results, or statements made in books on economics, history, and sociology, are particularly liable to distortion, intentionally or unintentionally. Indeed by selecting certain statistics and excluding others, almost anything depending upon statistics may be proved.

The importance is thus obvious of being able to detect signs of reliability and accuracy, and of discarding a writer who cannot be depended upon. It is also important to make it a rule to ask whether any result when reached appears to be reliable in the light of common sense. Sometimes a suggestion of error will be observed if the subject is looked at in this light, which if traced back will lead to the discovery of some mistake in observation or some error in reasoning.

Evidence of unreliability shown by a writer may generally be discovered, if care is exercised. His temperament, age, environment, training, religion and other facts will contribute. One who is dogmatic or abusive in stating what are obviously mere opinions which cannot be demonstrated, or who is intolerant of those who reach different conclusions, is obviously by temperament untrustworthy. A writer who in a single instance can be shown to have intentionally distorted facts should, of course, be at once and forever rejected;[[2]] one who has distorted facts unintentionally may perhaps be forgiven once. So a writer who, in a matter not capable of mathematical demonstration, and to some extent a matter of opinion, sets out to prove a preconceived idea, shows himself in general not possessed of the qualities which should inspire confidence.

By these and other tests the student should constantly be on the watch to form his opinion of the credibility and reliability of a writer or experimenter whose work he is studying. He may thus guide himself as to the books which he should pursue carefully, remembering the dictum of Bacon that "Some books are to be tasted, others to be swallowed, and some few to be chewed and digested," except that very few, if any, are to be literally swallowed without digestion. By careful observance of the injunction to study constantly the credibility of a writer one may become what may be termed a discriminating student.