Latest / Short Nonfiction Collection / The Younger Generation of American Genius (1916)

Transcript

The Younger Generation of American Genius (1916) · Short Nonfiction Collection

0:00
The Younger Generation of American Genius by Scott Nearing, published in the Scientific Monthly,
0:08
January nineteen sixteen, Volume two, number one, pages forty eight sixty
0:12
one. This is the Liberyvox according or Liberyvox accordings in the public domain.
0:18
For more information on volunteer please visit libervoxa orgue recorded by Leon Harvey. The
0:25
Younger Generation of American Genius by Professor Scott Nearing, Tylerdell University, one the
0:33
group under forty five. A study of the first ten thousand American born persons
0:39
whose names appeared in Whose Who in America for nineteen twelve to thirteen showed beyond
0:45
any reasonable question that up to that time New England had made a contribution of
0:49
eminent Americans far out of proportion to her population. This fact held true for
0:54
New England as a whole. Furthermore, the number of distinguished persons per one
0:59
hundred thousand of pop was larger in every New England state than in any other
1:03
state in the Union. So decisive was the advantage of New England that Rhode
1:08
Island, the New England state with the lowest proportion of distinguished persons per one
1:12
hundred thousand of population, was thirty percent above New York, the state which
1:19
outside of New England, had the highest proportion of distinguished persons per one hundred
1:23
thousand of population. The ten thousand persons considered in the first study were,
1:27
for the most part well along in life. Only one in one hundred was
1:32
born since eighteen eighty only fourteen one hundred born since eighteen seventy. More than
1:37
a quarter the eminent persons were born before eighteen fifty, making them at least
1:40
sixty two years old. The table showed clearly enough that the advantage of New
1:46
England over the other sections of the country decreased in latter decades. Among the
1:51
eminent persons born before eighteen fifty, thirty percent were born in New England,
1:56
which in eighteen fifty reported but eleven point eight percent of the total population of
2:00
the United States, whereas for the decade Asian eighty two eighty nine, the
2:05
proportion of eminent persons born in New England was twelve percent, as compared to
2:08
a seven point five percent of the population reported from that section. Certain critics
2:14
insisted that proves a point the position of New England as the mother of American
2:19
genius is on the Wain Mega study the group born since eighteen seventy the people
2:23
who are under forty five, and you will see the difference. This is
2:28
the study. During the first three quarters of the nineteenth century, a number
2:31
of distinguished men, out of all proportion to a population was born in New
2:37
England. Next to New England, the Middle Atlantic and the East North Central
2:42
States had a considerable lead over the remainder of the country. Was this lead
2:46
of the northeast section of the United States due to some special advantage that inherited
2:51
in the race stock, the climate, the educational facilities, or some like
2:54
features order the mere momentum or tradition, an established prestige. Such a question
3:00
cannot be answered categorically, but analysis of the younger group of distinguished Americans will
3:06
show where that Tennessees noted in the previous study are so evidently casting laurel wreaths
3:12
at the feet of New England. Two, the place of birth. New
3:17
England cannot claim the same oversharing position in the production of genius in the younger
3:22
generation that so clearly belonged to her in the earlier decades. While her position
3:28
is still good, is far from commanding The figures have been compiled first according
3:32
to geographical area. The two thousand distinguished persons are distributed over nine groups of
3:38
states. The largest number come from the Middle Atlantic States, the smallest from
3:43
the Mountain States. Table one is splate on the page number of percent of
3:46
eminent persons born in the various geographical divisions of the United States with the percent
3:52
of the total population of the United States in each division in eighteen eighty.
3:57
The real interest in Table one centers in the relation between them number of people
4:00
were living in a given geographical area and the group of distinguished men produced by
4:04
this geographic area. Thus, New England, with eight percent of the total
4:09
population of the United States in age and eighty, produced sixteen percent of the
4:13
group of distinguished persons under consideration. The Middle Atlantic States, with twenty one
4:18
percent of the population, produced twenty five percent of the distinguished persons. The
4:23
East North Central States, with twenty four percent of the distinguished persons, report
4:27
only twenty two percent of the population. The Pacific States, with two point
4:30
five percent of distinguished persons, contained two point three percent of the population.
4:35
These four sections produced a percentage of distinguished persons greater than the percentage of the
4:40
total population living within their boundaries. The Mountain States show the same percentage of
4:46
population and of distinguished persons. The West North Central States and all of the
4:50
group of Southern States show a percentage of distinguished persons considerably less than the proportion
4:56
of the population. A map of the United States, store to represent the
5:00
relation between population and the production of distinguished persons, would show New England considerably
5:05
in the lead, with a proportion of distinguished persons twice as great as a
5:09
proportion of the population. The Middle Atlantic and the East North Central States,
5:15
while producing a far lower proportion of distinguished persons than New England, produced a
5:18
far higher number. These three groups of states combined are responsible for two thirds
5:24
of all the distinguished persons included in this study. The variation in individual states
5:30
is considerable. The dominance of the New England States is still evident, though
5:34
not so marked as it was in the study of ten thousand distinguished native born
5:39
persons from the Volume of Whose Who for nineteen twelve to thirteen. From that
5:44
study, it appeared that each part of the New England States individually reported a
5:47
higher proportion of distinguished persons than any other state in the United states. This
5:53
situation no longer exists with regard to the younger persons of distinction. Thus,
5:58
while the number of distinguished persons per one hundred thousand population in Asian eighty was
6:01
three point nine for the United States, for Maine it was four point eight,
6:05
New Hampshire eight point nine, Vermont five point four, Massachusetts ten point
6:12
four, Rhode Island eight point three, Connecticut six point six. Thus,
6:16
each of the New England states was a head of the number for the entire
6:19
country. At the same time, three states reported a higher number of distinguished
6:25
persons per one thousand population than the lowest New England state, Maine. These
6:30
states were New York five point eight, California five point one, Maryland five
6:33
point zero. New Jersey reported the same number as Maine, namely four point
6:39
eight. The fact remains that each of the New England states except Maine,
6:43
reports the higher number of distinguished persons than any other state in the United States,
6:47
while Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island show a number of distinguished
6:53
persons nearly twice as great as any other state in the United States. Another
6:59
issue is raided when the problem of city environment is considered. The recent developments
7:03
of city life incident to the growth of the modern industrial world have thrown increasing
7:09
emphasis upon the necessity for shaping city requirements to meet human needs. There is
7:14
a general supposition that the country boy has an advantage over the city boy.
7:18
That this was not true in the earlier decades was shown very clearly in the
7:23
study of ten thousand distinguished Americans. The twenty seven cities which reported a population
7:28
of more than twenty thousand eighteen fifty contained approximately one eighth the population, but
7:32
reporter called the total eminent persons. The same thing is true of the distinguished
7:38
persons born since eighteen sixty nine. Table two is displayed on the page number
7:45
of percent of eminent persons born in cities having a population of twenty five thousand
7:48
or over in eighteen seventy, together with the percent of the population living in
7:53
those cities eighteen seventy. Among the two thousand distinguished persons under consideration, six
8:00
hundred forty or thirty two percent were born in the fifty cities reporting a population
8:03
of twenty five thousand and over in eighteen seventy. These cities in eighteen seventy
8:07
contained five million, seven hundred twenty three thousand, four hundred ninety six persons,
8:13
or fourteen point eight percent of the total population of the United States in
8:16
eighteen seventy. In other words, the proportion of distinguished persons born in the
8:20
latter decades is higher a city environment than appeared in the earlier decades. The
8:26
records for individual cities compared with the records for the country at large, are
8:31
indeed remarkable. The number of distinguished persons per one hundred thousand population in certain
8:37
of these cities was as follows. The fagundity of certain cities in distinguished persons
8:43
is indeed surprising. Cambridge, with forty seven point five per one hundred thousand,
8:48
is far in the lead. Nashville, the second city, with thirty
8:50
four point nine, again has considerable advantage over Columbia, Ohio twenty five point
8:56
six and Lynn, Massachusetts twenty four point eight. Washington falls in as city
9:01
number five, with a record of twenty point two. After this point,
9:07
the cities range themselves with some degree of equality. The cities which show the
9:11
highest proportion of distinguished persons per population are not the large cities. Indeed,
9:16
the large cities occupy a place of distinct inferiority in this respect. Throughout this
9:20
table of individual cities, it is evident that no particular section occupies a position
9:26
of importance. Thus, the leading city is in Massachusetts. The second most
9:31
prominent city is in Tennessee. Most of the cities are, of course taken
9:35
from the northern tier of the country, because most of the cities of the
9:39
country are in this tier, But the southern section, in proportion to the
9:41
number of its cities, is well represented. Table three is as splayed on
9:46
the page number in proportion of distinguished persons born in certain cities. The proportion
9:52
of eminent persons born in cities seem to be higher in the latter than in
9:56
the earlier decade. Thus, than a decade from eighteen semi to eighting seve
10:00
seventy nine, thirty one point three percent of the total distinguished persons were born
10:03
in the cities, and in the next decade eighteen eighty two eighteen eighty nine,
10:07
thirty six point five percent were born in cities. While the only two
10:11
persons born between eighteen ninety and eighteen ninety nine whose names appearing the Who's Who
10:16
in America were of city origin. The supremacy of the cities over the rural
10:20
districts is well illustrated by a consideration of the relation existing between place of birth
10:24
and occupation. It should be born in mind that the fifty cities which reported
10:30
a population of twenty five thousand or over in eighteen seventy contained about one seventh
10:35
of the total population of the country in that year. The percent of city
10:41
born persons in certain occupations appears in the following table. Table fours is played
10:46
on the page number in percent of eminent persons classified by occupations who were born
10:52
in cities. The clergymen report the smallest percentage of city origin, falling to
10:58
one fifth. The highest proportion for actors and authors show more than two fifths
11:03
of city origin. Businessmen appear in almost the same class. A third of
11:09
the lawyers, journalists, and doctors are born in the city, while the
11:11
quarter of the educators, public officeholders, and scientists are of city origin.
11:16
In every occupation, with the exception of clergymen, that proportion of persons of
11:20
city origin is far greater than the relation between city and rural population would seem
11:26
to warrant. The younger generations are distinguished. Americans were born in the North
11:31
and East sections of the United States. Although the lead of New England is
11:35
not so pronounced as it was in the earlier decades, it is still considerable.
11:39
These persons were born in cities. The large cities of the United States,
11:43
containing a seventh of the population, produced a third of the younger generation
11:48
of distinguished Americans. The leaders of American life are still coming from a small
11:52
area in the northeastern part of the United States, and particularly from the cities
11:58
there. The time of birth. Little can be said about the period of
12:03
birth are the distinguished persons under consideration, because almost nine tenths of them were
12:07
born between the decades between eighteen seventy and eighteen seventy nine. Since the group
12:13
under consideration must necessarily be less than forty five years of age, the earlier
12:16
decade would naturally contain most of them. Table five is splayed on the page
12:22
number percent of eminent persons who were born at certain periods. Four. Education.
12:30
The chief advantage ascribed to New England by many of the cities of the
12:33
previous study lay in her educational system. Although it was impossible to secure from
12:39
the biographical records in Who's Who any satisfactory statement of the common school education,
12:45
there was a very general record of college attendants. The figures showing college affiliation
12:50
are significant. Table six is displayed on the page college affiliation of Eminent Persons.
12:58
Three quarters of the younger generation of eminent persons are college graduates. They
13:03
caption no college affiliation may include certain persons who graduated from college but failed to
13:09
state the fact when they made out their biographies. Almost nine tenths reports some
13:15
college affiliation among the younger group of distinguished Americans. A college education seems to
13:20
be a recognized necessity. For a century the New England and Middle Atlantic States
13:26
were the home of colleges. Does the fact have any marked effect on the
13:30
extent of college affiliation. The following table seems to answer the question in the
13:33
negative. Table seven is is played on the page College affiliation of Distinguished Persons,
13:39
classified by geographical area. The percent of distinguished persons having no college affiliation
13:46
does not vary greatly for one geographic area to the other. It is highest
13:50
in the Middle Atlantic States and lowest in the South Central States. The figures
13:54
for individual colleges are, however, significant, suggesting again that there is a
13:58
certain caring power invested culture, which is a large asset in the success of
14:03
the individual who comes into contact with it. Although the figures for individual colleges
14:09
were in a sense unsatisfactory, which they were so scattering, in another sense
14:15
they were profoundly significant. Table eight. Now as a distinguished persons graduating from
14:22
certain specified colleges. The persons under consideration were born since eighteen sixty nine.
14:30
They were therefore graduated for the most part since eighteen ninety. If the figures
14:33
had reference to the middle of the nineteenth century, it might readily be taken
14:37
for granted that they would pile up in certain of the older colleges. But
14:41
these graduations have all occurred since eighteen ninety, in the age of many colleges.
14:46
Nevertheless, the piling up process is evident. Harvard leads the race,
14:52
and say for Yale, she is not even a respectable competitor. Among the
14:56
two thousand distinguished persons of the younger generation, Harvard has graduated almost as many
15:00
as Columbia, Cornell, Pennsylvania, and Michigan combined, almost as many as
15:05
Columbia, Cornell, Pennsylvania and Princeton combined, almost as many as Wisconsin,
15:11
Stanford and Massachusetts, Institute of Technology, John Hopkins, Chicago, and California
15:16
combined, Harrava Regyale together have graduated twenty four more of these distinguished persons in
15:20
Columbia, Cornell, Pennsylvania, and Princeton combined. The supremacy of these two
15:26
institutions, and of Harvard in particular, is little short of astounding. The
15:31
effectives of these two institutions becomes even more remarkable when account is taken of the
15:35
geographical distribution of their graduates. Most of the colleges as show a great majority
15:41
of localized graduations. Thus, among fifty two distinguished graduates at Columbia, thirty
15:46
four were born in the Middle Atlantic States. Among thirty four at Princeton,
15:50
twenty were born in the Middle Atlantic States. Among twenty five at California,
15:54
nineteen were born in the Pacific States. Among the forty four at Michigan,
15:58
three were born in the East North Central States. The contrast between these institutions
16:04
and Harravard and Yale is strongly brought out in the following table. Table nine
16:11
is splayed on the page place of birth and college affiliation of distinguished persons for
16:15
certain colleges. Yet even more than Haravard seems to have drawn her distinguished alumni
16:21
from all parts of the country, and both of these colleges have done this
16:25
in a unique way that is without parallel among the other colleges for which returns
16:29
were tabulated, with the single exception of Stanford. The dissenter will argue that
16:34
the very fact of the wide geographical distribution of the distinguished persons from Harvard and
16:40
Yale is a proof that the pick up respective college students for more sections choose
16:45
Harvard and Yale. At the same time, something must be said for the
16:48
power which an ideal of culture may exert. It is true as many historians
16:53
assert that the spirit of Athens and Rome kinnled the fires of genius in their
16:57
sons, then it may be equally true that the spirit at Harvard at a
17:02
Yale kinnels the fire of genius in their sons. Culture is a power somewhere,
17:07
it must be centered. Both the studies and distinguished Americans which are under
17:12
consideration seem to show a high pressure area of culture over New England and centering
17:17
in her great institutions of learning five occupations. The persons whose names appear in
17:26
Whose Who in America are a most wholly professional people among the thirty eight million,
17:30
one hundred sixty seven thousand, three hundred and thirty six gainfully occupied persons
17:34
in the United States in nineteen ten, four in each hundred were in professions.
17:40
Yet among the two thousand distinguished persons under consideration, eighteen each hundred were
17:45
in the professions. Either it is true that professional people make up the bulk
17:48
of distinguished persons in the community, or else the people who are named from
17:52
whose who are picked from the professional classes. Experience would lead to the belief
18:00
that the leaders have picked from the professional classes. Educators are far in the
18:04
lead among the occupational groups. Indeed, they contribute nearly a quarter of the
18:08
total, and almost twice as large a group as the scientists, who reconnect
18:12
authors and public of soldiers rank close together. The rear is brought up by
18:18
the learned professions lawyers, doctors, and clergymen. These three groups, with
18:22
the journalists, make up a less percentage than the educators alone. Table ten
18:27
is is played on the page number and percent of eminent persons born since eighteen
18:32
sixty nine. In certain occupations, the real surprise in the occupation figures arise
18:37
out of a comparison between the occupations of the persons of all ages studied in
18:41
the Who's Who for nineteen twelve to thirteen and the persons born since eighteen sixty
18:45
nine included in the present study. Some of the differences existing between the two
18:52
groups are striking. Table eleven is played on the page percent of persons of
18:56
various occupations as appearing in whose head wo for two periods of time. The
19:03
gains are made by educators, authors, and scientists. Scientists in particular have
19:07
doubled that percentage. The greatest decline is shown by clergymen and by lawyers.
19:12
It seems little surprising that there should have been a decrease in the proportion of
19:17
business men. There is always a possibility that the method is selecting names for
19:21
the Who's Who volume may have changed for that years in a way to place
19:23
greater emphasis on some occupations unless on others. At the same time, daily
19:29
experience verifies most of the showings made by these figures. Apparently, community leadership
19:36
expresses itself through the professions pre eminently. At the same time, during recent
19:41
years, there is a rapidly changing significance in professions. Educators, scientists,
19:47
authors, public officials and businessmen no make up the body of leadership. The
19:51
old time learned professions comprise a comparatively small element in a whole group of distinguished
19:56
Americans. Six Differences of Distinguished Americans. The most impressive fact which the study
20:03
of sex distribution among distinguished Americans brings to light is a phenomenally small proportion of
20:08
women whose names are included among the first two thousand names of American born persons
20:15
appearing in Whose Who. In America, only one hundred and sixty nine are
20:18
the names of women. There is no section of the country in which the
20:22
number of women approaches that of men. There is considerable variation. The number
20:26
of women per hundred men is higher in the West than in the East,
20:30
and higher in the North than in the South. At the same time,
20:33
the RATIU is at best extremely low. Table twelve. Sex distribution among the
20:38
younger generation of distinguished Americans by geographic areas. The names of women appear very
20:45
unequally in the various occupations. The women listed among the first two thousand names
20:49
in whose Who constitute eight point four percent of the whole. There are four
20:53
occupations, as classified in Table thirteen, for which that distinguished women are practically
20:57
non existent, and two others in which they make but of sorry showing lawyers,
21:04
business men, public office holders, and clergymen include five hundred seventy seven
21:08
men, or thirty two percent of the total number of distinguished men. The
21:12
same four occupations report one woman, or a zero point five percent of the
21:17
distinguished women at of these four occupations doctors and scientists, and the aggregate of
21:22
the six occupations is nine hundred fifteen fifty percent of all distinguished men. The
21:29
same six occupations report only six three point five percent of the distinguished women.
21:33
The six occupations lawyers, business men, public office holders, clergy doctors,
21:37
and scientists report nine hundred fifteen distinguished men and six distinguished women, a ratio
21:44
of zero point six women to one hundred men. Table thirteen is splayed on
21:48
the page six distribution of first two thousand American born persons appearing in whose who
21:52
from nineteen fourteen to fifteen who have been born since eighteen sixty nine, by
21:57
occupation. The great bulk of the distinguished women listed among the first two thousand
22:03
native born persons and whose who are educators, authors, or actresses. These
22:07
three occupations, with six hundred twenty three distinguished men, thirty four percent of
22:11
the total number, have one hundred and eighteen distinguished women seventy percent of the
22:17
total number in these three occupations. Therefore, the ratio of women to men
22:21
is one to five. The one occupation of a considerable magnitude in which women
22:26
approached men is that of author. Of the two hundred thirty two authors listed
22:30
among the first two thousand American born persons and whose who seventy five thirty two
22:36
percent are women. At the same time, the seventy five women authors comprise
22:41
almost one half our the distinguished women whose names appear in Whose Who. This
22:45
showing takes on peculiar significance in view of the fact that until within the last
22:49
thirty or forty years, women were practically excluded from law, public office,
22:53
the ministry, medicine, and higher education, or they were admitted with some
22:59
degree of freedom to the fields of education and journalism, and could not,
23:03
in the very nature of the case, be excluded from authorship. It may
23:07
be true, as some students urge, that women are peculiarly adapted to emotional
23:11
activities, of which certain lines of the de reachievement are typical. At the
23:17
same time, the searcher after truth may point with equal justification to the fact
23:21
that women occupy a position commensurate without occupied by men in the one profession where
23:26
they have been given an opportunity. The figures dealing with the decade of birth
23:33
lead emphasis to the idea that the failure of women to attain positions of distinction
23:37
has been due in the past to the restriction and opportunity women have been free
23:41
to enter upon careers that lead to public distinction only within the past thirty or
23:45
forty years. Extensive higher education of women does not date back more than twenty
23:49
or twenty five years. Table fourteen is splayed on the page sex distribution or
23:56
first two thousand persons in the Husho in America, not in fourteen to fifteen
24:00
who have been born since eighteen sixty nine. Among the distinguished persons born between
24:04
eighteen seventy and eighteen seventy nine, there are only eight women per hundred men.
24:08
In the next decade, this number increases to eighteen, more than double.
24:14
And the last decade, where of course the figures are so few as
24:17
to be wholly undependable, the ratio is even. The latter figures will undoubtedly
24:21
show an increase in the ratio of women to men. Seven conclusions the facts
24:29
were going. The place and time of birth, education, occupation, and
24:33
sex of the younger generation of distinguished Americans lead to some rather significant conclusions.
24:40
New England, though no longer Supreme, is still distinctly in the Senate as
24:44
a producer of American leadership. The leadership comes out of the cities to a
24:48
far greater degree than it does from rural districts. In certain cities like Cambridge
24:52
and Nashville, the forcundity in distinguished persons is exceptional. Among the persons listed
24:57
in Whose Who who were born after eighteen six twenty nine, the great majority
25:00
were born in the decade eighteen seventy to seventy nine. The younger generation of
25:06
distinguished Americans consists almost wholly of college graduates. In a list of colleges which
25:11
have educated these distinguished persons, certain institutions, notably Harvard and Yale, stand
25:17
out pre eminently as trainers of leadership. The old learned professions, law,
25:22
medicine, and the ministry are losing very rapidly in favor of science and education.
25:26
There has been a revolution in the source from which community leadership is secured.
25:30
The younger generation of distinguished Americans is overwhelmingly male. Only a few women
25:36
have pushed into the ranks, and they are founded only three professions. The
25:40
tendencies which were noted in the earlier study of distinguished Americans appear in this latter
25:44
study, some less and some more marked. Leadership arises even in this last
25:48
generation from one half of the population. The men from one small group of
25:53
the population. The college bread from one more geographic area, the northeastern section
25:59
of the United slis dates from one small group of occupations. The professions and
26:06
of the younger generation of American Genius by Scott Nearing, recorded by Leon Harvey