dispassionate　inquiry　into　the　place　which　modern　learning　holds
  in　modern　civilization　will　show　that　such　is　also　the　case　of
  this　latest；　and　in　the　mind　of　its　keepers　the　most　mature；
  system　of　knowledge。　It　should　by　no　means　be　an　insuperably
  difficult　matter　to　show　that　this　〃higher　learning〃　of　the
  modern　world；　the　current　body　of　science　and　scholarship；　also
  holds　its　place　on　such　a　tenure　of　use　and　wont；　that　it　has
  grown　and　shifted　in　point　of　content；　aims　and　methods　in
  response　to　the　changes　in　habits　of　life　that　have　passed　over
  the　Western　peoples　during　the　period　of　its　growth　and
  ascendancy。　Nor　should　it　be　embarrassingly　difficult　to　reach
  the　persuasion　that　this　process　of　change　and　supersession　in
  the　scope　and　method　of　knowledge　is　still　effectually　at　work；
  in　a　like　response　to　institutional　changes　that　still　are
  incontinently　going　forward。（1*）
  To　the　adepts　who　are　occupied　with　this　esoteric　knowledge；
  the　scientists　and　scholars　on　whom　its　keeping　devolves；　the
  matter　will　of　course　not　appear　in　just　that　light；　more
  particularly　so　far　as　regards　that　special　segment　of　the　field
  of　knowledge　with　the　keeping　and　cultivation　of　which　they　may；
  each　and　several；　be　occupied。　They　are；　each　and　several；
  engaged　on　the　perfecting　and　conservation　of　a　special　line　of
  inquiry；　the　objective　end　of　which；　in　the　view　of　its　adepts；
  will　necessarily　be　the　final　and　irreducible　truth　as　touches
  matters　within　its　scope。　But；　seen　in　perspective；　these　adepts
  are　themselves　to　be　taken　as　creatures　of　habit；　creatures　of
  that　particular　manner　of　group　life　out　of　which　their
  preconceptions　in　matters　of　knowledge；　and　the　manner　of　their
  interest　in　the　run　of　inquiry；　have　sprung。　So　that　the　terms　of
  finality　that　will　satisfy　the　adepts　are　also　a　consequence　of
  habituation；　and　they　are　to　be　taken　as　conclusive　only　because
  and　in　so　far　as　they　are　consonant　with　the　discipline　of
  habituation　enforced　by　that　manner　of　group　life　that　has
  induced　in　these　adepts　their　particular　frame　of　mind。
  Perhaps　at　a　farther　remove　than　many　other　current
  phenomena；　but　none　the　less　effectually　for　that；　the　higher
  learning　takes　its　character　from　the　manner　of　life　enforced　on
  the　group　by　the　circumstances　in　which　it　is　placed。　These
  constraining　circumstances　that　so　condition　the　scope　and　method
  of　learning　are　primarily；　and　perhaps　most　cogently；　the
  conditions　imposed　by　the　state　of　the　industrial　arts；　the
  technological　situation；　but　in　the　second　place；　and　scarcely
  less　exacting　in　detail；　the　received　scheme　of　use　and　wont　in
  its　other　bearings　has　its　effect　in　shaping　the　scheme　of
  knowledge；　both　as　to　its　content　and　as　touches　the　norms　and
  methods　of　its　organization。　Distinctive　and　dominant　among　the
  constituent　factors　of　this　current　scheme　of　use　and　wont　is　the
  pursuit　of　business；　with　the　outlook　and　predilections　which
  that　pursuit　implies。　Therefore　any　inquiry　into　the　effect　which
  recent　institutional　changes　may　have　upon　the　pursuit　of　the
  higher　learning　will　necessarily　be　taken　up　in　a　peculiar　degree
  with　the　consequences　which　an　habitual　pursuit　of　business　in
  modern　times　has　had　for　the　ideals；　aims　and　methods　of　the
  scholars　and　schools　devoted　to　the　higher　learning。
  The　Higher　Learning　as　currently　cultivated　by　the　scholars
  and　scientists　of　the　Western　civilization　differs　not
  generically　from　the　esoteric　knowledge　purveyed　by　specialists
  in　other　civilizations；　elsewhere　and　in　other　times。　It　engages
  the　same　general　range　of　aptitudes　and　capacities；　meets　the
  same　range　of　human　wants；　and　grows　out　of　the　same　impulsive
  propensities　of　human　nature。　Its　scope　and　method　are　different
  from　what　has　seemed　good　in　other　cultural　situations；　and　its
  tenets　and　canons　are　so　far　peculiar　as　to　give　it　a　specific
  character　different　from　these　others；　but　in　the　main　this
  specific　character　is　due　to　a　different　distribution　of　emphasis
  among　the　same　general　range　of　native　gifts　that　have　always
  driven　men　to　the　pursuit　of　knowledge。　The　stress　falls　in　a
  somewhat　obviously　different　way　among　the　canons　of　reality　by
  recourse　to　which　men　systematize　and　verify　the　knowledge
  gained；　which　is　in　its　turn　due　to　the　different　habituation　to
  which　civilized　men　are　subjected；　as　contrasted　with　the
  discipline　exercised　by　other　and　earlier　cultures。
  In　point　of　its　genesis　and　growth　any　system　of　knowledge
  may　confidently　be　run　back；　in　the　main；　to　the　initiative　and
  bias　afforded　by　two　certain　impulsive　traits　of　human　nature：　an
  Idle　Curiosity；　and　the　Instinct　of　Workmanship。（2*）
  In　this　generic　trait　the　modern　learning　does　not　depart
  from　the　rule　that　holds　for　the　common　run。　Men　instinctively
  seek　knowledge；　and　value　it。　The　fact　of　this　proclivity　is　well
  summed　up　in　saying　that　men　are　by　native　gift　actuated　with　an
  idle　curiosity；　　〃idle〃　in　the　sense　that　a　knowledge　of　things
  is　sought；　apart　from　any　ulterior　use　of　the　knowledge　so
  gained。（3*）　This；　of　course；　does　not　imply　that　the　knowledge　so
  gained　will　not　be　turned　to　practical　account。　In　point　of　fact；
  although　the　fact　is　not　greatly　relevant　to　the　inquiry　here　in
  hand；　the　native　proclivity　here　spoken　of　as　the　instinct　of
  workmanship　will　unavoidably　incline　men　to　turn　to　account；　in　a
  system　of　ways　and　means；　whatever　knowledge　so　becomes
  available。　But　the　instinct　of　workmanship　has　also　another　and
  more　pertinent　bearing　in　these　premises；　in　that　it　affords　the
  norms；　or　the　scheme　of　criteria　and　canons　of　verity；　according
  to　which　the　ascertained　facts　will　be　construed　and　connected　up
  in　a　body　of　systematic　knowledge。　Yet　the　sense　of　workmanship
  takes　effect　by　recourse　to　divers　expedients　and　reaches　its
  ends　by　recourse　to　varying　principles；　according　as　the
  habituation　of　workday　life　has　enforced　one　or　another　scheme　of
  interpretation　for　the　facts　with　which　it　has　to　deal。
  The　habits　of　thought　induced　by　workday　life　impose
  themselves　as　ruling　principles　that　govern　the　quest　of
  knowledge；　it　will　therefore　be　the　habits　of　thought　enforced　by
  the　current　technological　scheme　that　will　have　most　（or　most
  immediately）　to　say　in　the　current　systematization　of　facts。　The
  working　logic　of　the　current　state　of　the　industrial　arts　will
  necessarily　insinuate　itself　as　the　logical　scheme　which　must；　of
  course；　effectually　govern　the　interpretation　and　generalizations
  of　fact　in　all　their　commonplace　relations。　But　the　current　state
  of　the　industrial　arts　is　not　all　that　conditions　workmanship。
  Under　any　given　institutional　situation；　　and　the　modern　scheme
  of　use　and　wont；　law　and　order；　is　no　exception；workmanship　is
  held　to　a　more　or　less　exacting　conformity　to　several　tests　and
  standards　that　are　not　intrinsic　to　the　state　of　the　industrial
  arts；　even　if　they　are　not　alien　to　it；　such　as　the　requirements
  imposed　by　the　current　system　of　ownership　and　pecuniary　values。
  These　pecuniary　conditions　that　impose　themselves　on　the
  processes　of　industry　and　on　the　conduct　of　life；　together　with
  the　pecuniary　accountancy　that　goes　with　them　　the　price　system
  have　much　to　say　in　the　guidance　and　limitations　of　workmanship。
  And　when　and　in　so　far　as　the　habituation　so　enforced　in　the
  traffic　of　workday　life　goes　into　effect　as　a　scheme　of　logic
  governing　the　quest　of　knowledge；　such　principles　as　have　by
  habit　found　acceptance　as　being　conventionally　salutary　and
  conclusive　in　the　pecuniary　conduct　of　affairs　will　necessarily
  leave　their　mark　on　the　ideals；　aims；　methods　and　standards　of
  science　and　those　principles　and　scholarship。　More　particularly；
  standards　of　organization；　control　and　achievement；　that　have
  been　accepted　as　an　habitual　matter　of　course　in　the　conduct　of
  business　will；　by　force　of　habit；　in　good　part　reassert
  themselves　as　indispensable　and　conclusive　in　the　conduct　of　the
  affairs　of　learning。　While　it　remains　true　that　the　bias　of
  workmanship　continues　to　guide　the　quest　of　knowledge；　under　the
  conditions　imposed　by　modern　institutions　it　will　not　be　the
  naive　conceptions　of　primitive　workmanship　that　will　shape　the
  framework　of　the　modern　system　of　learning；　but　rather　the
  preconceptions　of　that　disciplined　workmanship　that　has　been
  instructed　in　the　logic　of　the　modern　technology　and