Los Angeles herald. [microfilm reel] (Los Angeles [Calif.]) 1900-1911, 1908-09-10
LETTER BOX DISCUSSIONS
STIMULATE ORIGINAL THOUGHT

Los ANGELES. Sept. 5.--[Editor
HERALD: 1t Is perhaps we'll for M. E.
g. that he prudently withheld his full
name when in these columns he ven
tured to question the validity of Frank
II. Stones position in regard to the
question Of the effect on human des-
tiny of environment, for we have Just
seen what he got'' in today's Public
Letter Box. Mr.. Stone certainly fused
the English language against him"
rather numerically.
/, for my part, read with pleasure
that admirable article of M. e. G.'s
wherein he referred to a certain Scan
dinavian legend in his vindication of
the dignity and potency of the human
will. 1t is not cant" Mr.. Stone, to
speak of the free will OF man; neither
Is IL "piffle" to assert that man can
mold his environment instead of sim
ply being nodded by II. What is the
difference, anyhow, between a weak
man and one that is strong? Simply
hthis: The weak man allows himself
to be nodded" by his environment,
while the other "molds" his environ
mentor at least does not follow the
line of least resistance and allow him
self to be nodded by 1t.
Mr.. Stone starts with the premise
that man is the sum Of his heredity
and environment and nothing more.
This he lays down as a postulate which
is absolutely unassailable, and he chal-
lenges the whole world to find any
flaw in 1t. He considers this as an
axiom which IL is impossible to go be-
hind, and upon this he bases the whole
fabric of his argument. Let us. then.
examine the proposition carefully.
In the first place, IL man were mere
ly the sum of his heredity and environ
ment 1t would necessarily follow that
the better the heredlty and the more
favorable the environment the greater
would be the man. Do we find this to
be the case? By no means. Man Is not
something that grows by the cumula-
tive process, by adding layers from
without or by the molding effect upon
his character of his environment. 1t
Is by his action Cor better, perhaps, by
his reaction) upon the conditions and
circumstances that he finds himself in
and which go to make up his environ
ment: in other words, by the use he
makes of his opportunities. It Is the
use he makes of his opportunities that
determines the rate of his progress, or
whether he progresses at all or not;
and history demonstrates that Ii Is not
the men that have had the greatest
opportunities that have done the most.
Not only that but 1t might perhaps be
said that for the most part the achieve
ratio to their opportunities. The pages
of history are full of illustrations of
this fact. The strong man makes step
ping stones out of stumbling blocks.
Surprising, then, we say that man
Is the product OF his heredity and en-
vironment. If I wished to enter into
Joint debate with Mr.. Stone (Which
do not at the present time), should
have him define exactly what he means
by "heredity." In the absence of any
thing to indicate the contrary, as
sumo that he means by "heredity'
those traits and tendencies that are in
herited from or through the parents.
I assume that he uses the term In the
popular and ordinary sense of the
physical organism with its inherited
tendencies and traits) which the soul
is provided with by It's parents. CThis'
of course, assumes that Mr.. stone be-
lieves In the existence of such a thing
as the soul.) 1t will be seen, &erefore,
that this term "heredity" means little
more than environment" ana hence,
when II Is said that man is the product
Of his heredity and environment, and
nothing more, il altogether ignores the
existence of that divinity in man
which shapes his ends amid the vicis-
STUDIES of life and which enables man
70 triumph over adverse circum-
stances.
AS said by another contributor to
these columns the most that one can
expect in discussions OF this kind Is to
suggest different points of view. l en-
iov these discussions, however, for
thew stimulate original thought and en-
able one to see the different points of
view. r. c. STEWART.