It  is  abundantly  evident  that  we  have  not  reached
the  end  proposed  at  the  outset. We  have  not  suc-
ceeded in  determining  the  radical  and  essential
characters  of  men  and  women  uninfluenced  by
external  modifying  conditions. Sometimes  a  suffi-
ciently wide  induction  of  facts  (as  in  the  question  of
the  alleged  sexual  differences  in  respiration)  suffices
to  show  us  what  is  artificial  and  what  is  real;    at


CONCLUSION. 441

other  times  (as  in  the  question  of  differences  in
sensibility)  the  wider  our  induction  of  facts  the
more  complex  and  mobile  become  our  results. We
have  to  recognise  that  our  present  knowledge  of  men
and  women  cannot  tell  us  what  they  might«  be  or
what  they  ought  to  be,  but  what  they  actually  are,
under  the  conditions  of  civilisation. By  showing  us
that  under  varying  conditions  men  and  women  are,
within  certain  limits,  indefinitely  modifiable,  a  precise
knowledge  of  the  actual  facts  of  the  life  of  men  and
women  forbids  us  to  dogmatise  rigidly  concerning  the
respective  spheres  of  men  and  women. It  is  a  matter
which  experience  alone  can  demonstrate  in  detail. If
this  is  not  exactly  the  result  which  we  set  out  to
attain,  it  is  still  a  result  of  very  considerable  import-
ance. It  lays  the  axe  at  the  root  of  many  pseudo-
scientific  superstitions. It  clears  the  ground  of  much
unnecessary  verbiage  and  fruitless  discussion,  and
enables  us  to  see  more  clearly  the  really  essential
points  at  issue. The  small  group  of  women  who
wish  to  prove  the  absolute  inferiority  of  the  male  sex,
the  larger  group  of  men  who  wish  to  circumscribe
rigidly  the  sphere  of  women,  must  alike  be  ruled  out
of  court. Nor  may  we  listen  to  those  would-be
scientific  dogmatists  who  on  a,  priori  grounds,  on  the
strength  of  some  single  and  often  doubtful  anatomical
fact,  lay  down  social  laws  for  mankind  at  large. The
ludicrous  errors  of  arrogant  and  over-hasty  brain
anatomists  in  the  past  should  alone  suffice  to  teach
us  this  caution. The  facts  are  far  too  complex  to
enable  us  to  rush  hastily  to  a  conclusion  as  to  their
significance. The  facts,  moreover,  are  so  numerous
that  even  when  we  have  ascertained  the  precise  signi-
ficance of  some  one  fact,  we  cannot  be  sure  that  it  is
not  contradicted  by  other  facts. 