Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1921-01-12
Winding the Clock of Life.


DR.. Raymond Pearls comparison in
a lecture of the duration of human
life with the running of a clock will
strike the average person as decided
ly happy. 1t is easy to think of one
man, owing to his inherited mechan-
ism, as being wound up" for eighty
wears and of another as wound up
for only sixty or less.
Humanity, according to DR.. Pearls
analogue, is made up not exactly OF
what we may call 7-day clocks and
24-hour clocks, as in the case of the
ordinary mechanical timepieces, but
rather of S-day clocks, 24-hour
clocks and clocks all the way be-
tween; and in all cases it is more or
less matter of mechanism. The child
of long-lived parents has much bet
ter chance to attain long life than
the child of short-ived parents. And
yet, since the elements are so mixed,
no man can bank upon living to the
age of 80 merely because his father
attained that age.
We know that, so to speak, an g.
day clock may have been married to
a 24-hour clock; the father may have
belonged to a long lived people and
the mother to short lived people.
In that case will the progeny be long
lived like the father, short lived like
the mother, or somewhere in be-
tween? TO answer the question, we
must wait until the person concerned
is dead; in which case it will then be
all the same to him whether his pa
rents were long lived or short lived,
or both.
The interesting thing about DR..
Pearls deductions is the degree of
scientific assurance that they contain
that, if one lives to a certain old age,
one is getting the benefit of a good,
sound, snug winding up that ones
fathers gave to ones physical organ
ism. The Scriptures put it right; If
one reaches the age of fourscore, it
is "by reason of strength" and not
altogether ones own strength either.
But does long life depend altogeth-
er on inheritance? Is there no chance
for the individual to attain long life
as against an ancestral winding up"
for a shorter period? DR.. Pearl cer-
tainly has not asserted that. There
is this difference between the clock
and the human organism, that man
is combination of mind and of ply
sical mechanism, whereas the clock
is altogether machine. A man may
be wound up for sixty years, and yet
a wise, healthy, calm ample and truly
conservative course of living may en-
able him to survive to eighty. In a
sense, the man may wind himself up
again. And by so doing he may, pre-
sumably, help to wind up his Off
spring for longer run than his par
ents had. Indeed, that is what the
whole human race seems to be doing
at the present time.
We cannot shake off inheritance
we may even make sure that it is
the dominating factor in the duration
of life-but by little and little,
through sanitation and better housing
ana clothing, ampler punishment,
and easier conditions of life, we are
winding up the clock for a longer
run. 1t is apparent from the words
of Moses, as reported in the Psalms,
that fourscore years in his day was
regarded as about the same thing as
fourscore and ten now. And the gain
in the expectation of life has chiefly
been made lin the last two genera
tions. The human 24-hour clock is
becoming obsolete.-Boston Tran
script.