THE effort of the social sciences, no less than of other sciences, is to understand the mechanism or technique of the phenomena with which they deal, which is, in their case, the processes of social life. They endeavor, like all science, to explain phenomena by describing fully all conditions essential to their occurrence. In this broad sense, there is no difference in the spirit and method of the so-called natural sciences and of the social sciences. The social sciences are as many true sciences as the physical sciences; but on account of the complexity of the phenomena with which they deal they have more difficulty than having the physical sciences in becoming bodies of accurate, tested knowledge, such as every science aspires to be.

The physical sciences have become bodies of accurate, tested knowledge largely through the method of experimentation, which is the method of observing phenomena under such controlled conditions that they can usually be accurately compared and measured. While this method is not absolutely closed to the social sciences, it seems to have such limited possibilities in the fields of social phenomena that the scientific student of social life is forced to depend largely upon other methods, such as the observation, comparison, and correlation of social phenomena. Measurement is, however, not essential to science, and it is a mistake to think of science as merely or chiefly "a quantitative statement of objective facts". The most important statements of modern science, for example, those connected with the theory of evolution, are not quantitative statements, but statements of developmental relations; and to limit science to quantitative formulations is unwarranted by either the history or the nature of science. Quantitative measurement's are desirable in every science for the sake of exact ness; but the social sciences for a long time will probably have to content themselves with the critical analysis, comparison and (4) correlation of social phenomena. While they may not become exact quantitative statements, the social sciences may become bodies of critically established, and therefore, of trustworthy knowledge. In the broad field of the social sciences, sociology is usually recognized as the most general of the sciences of social phenomena. Starting with a common-sense view of the world, sociology and the other social sciences seek to show how certain conditions or forces make that part of our experience which we call "social" what it is from moment to moment. They aim to make human society and its changes intelligible.

To some extent, psychologists have recognized the value of anthropological material, but they have been very slow to recognize the value of the historical and statistical study. Manifestly, however, the development of human culture, and so of social behavior, is a historical process. Social behavior can be understood only through understanding its historical conditions. If psychologists really wish to aid in the development of the social sciences, they must get out of their laboratories and. study historical records and human communities. Why should they not? Both human history and existing community life are manifestations of the human mind and in some respects clearer manifestations than any that can be studied in the laboratory. Psychologists can be of immense help to students of human society, but they will have to broaden their methods if they are to render truly scientific aid in the understanding of all the complexities of collective human behavior.