ws. The road to mastery leads through
patient observation, experiment, and study.

But we are concerned with the _educational_ value of the natural
sciences. Waitz says: "A correct philosophy of the world and of life
is possible to a person only on the basis of a knowledge of one's self
and of one's relation to surrounding nature." Diesterweg says: "No one
can afford to neglect a knowledge of nature who desires to get a
comprehension of the world and of God according to human possibility,
or who desires to find his proper relation to Him and to real things.
He who knows nothing of human history is an ignoramus, likewise he who
knows nothing of natural science. To know nothing of either is a pure
shame. Ignorance of nature is an unpardonable perversion." Kraepelin
speaks as follows; "Instruction should open up to a pupil an
understanding of the present, and thereby furnish a basis for a frank
and many-sided philosophy of life, resting upon reality. But to the
present belongs the world outside of us. Of this present there can be
no such thing as an understanding unless it relates not only to
inter-human relations but also to relations of man to animal, of animal
to plant, and of organic life to inorganic life. The necessity of
assuming a relation to our environment is unavoidable and this can only
be done by acquainting ourselves with the surrounding world in every
direction. This requirement would remain in force though man, like a
god, were set above nature and her laws. But man lives, acts, and dies
not outside of, but within the circle of nature's laws. This maxim is
axiomatic and contains the final judgment against those who claim that
a comprehensive but unified philosophy of life is possible without a
knowledge of nature." Herbart says: "Here (in nature) lies the abode
of real truth, which does not retreat before tests into an inaccessible
past (as does history). This genuinely empirical character
distinguishes the natural sciences and makes their loss irretrievable.
It is here (in nature) that the object disentangles itself from all
fancies and opinions and constantly stimulates the spirit of
observation. Here then is found an obstruction to extravagant thinking
such as the sciences themselves could not better devise." Ziller says:
"The natural sciences are necessary in education because from the
province of nature (as well as from history) are derived those means
and resources which are necessary