ABSTRACT
EUGENICS may be defined in the words of Galton as the science of the agencies under social control which may improve or impair the racial qualities of future generations. As so defined there can be no doubt of its importance. Whatever view we may take of the nature of civilization and of the forces which bring about social change, we must admit that the genetic constitution of the stock which is the bearer of civilization is a matter deserving of study. The inclusion of the notion of social control in the definition has perhaps its dangers. It tends to obscure the distinction between pure and applied science, which in this case is of especial importance. While in animals and plants experimental breeding on an empirical basis is completely justified both on practical and scientific grounds, in dealing with human beings it has to be borne in mind that to justify social control we need a great deal more than a merely rough empirical knowledge of heredity, and indeed more than a scientific genetics. We need to know the broader social effects of selective breeding, and we need ethical and aesthetic standards of value by the aid of which we could decide what to breed for. In short, applied eugenics requires not only genetics but sociology and social philosophy. A survey of eugenic literature suggests very strongly that this requirement has been overlooked, with the result that biological conclusions, well or ill founded in themselves, have been used as the basis for practical policies, which could be justified, if at all, only after elaborate sociological and ethical study.
