dexterity. a colloquy

Irish Jesuit Province

Dexterity. A ColloquyAuthor(s): N. C.Source: The Irish Monthly, Vol. 9, No. 97 (Jul., 1881), pp. 381-388Published by: Irish Jesuit ProvinceStable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20496562 .

Accessed: 16/06/2014 12:22

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

.JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Irish Jesuit Province is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Irish Monthly.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 91.229.229.210 on Mon, 16 Jun 2014 12:22:19 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=ijp

http://www.jstor.org/stable/20496562?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


Dexterity. 381

ecclesiastical dignity. In this respect he meted to others the same measure also. When, in after years, he was bishop, one of his Roman students, returning with " a doctor's cap,"'was encouraged to hold the title in abeyance, "lest he should be confounded with one of my

Vicars." Even in the races in which rider and horse, Archer and Iroquois,

have to condense all their energies within a couple of minutes, much is said to depend on staying power. How much more in the long race of life! In our early student years we can do little more than learn how to learn. Those who go on working and learning in after years will win the race from those who may have far outstripped them in the preliminary canter. We are not told what became of the clever youth who so rudely rebuked his fellow-student; but it is hardly rash judgment to suppose that his ecclesiastical career was not more dis tinguished than Michael Blake's.

Pausing here, we may end for the present with the remark that these slight biographical notes, though planned for a good while, have at the last moment been put into print too abruptly in this July

Number of our Magazine, partly because the 16th of this month is the anniversary of Dr. Blake's birth. We have not waited to weave together in order all the particulars which may be ascertainable about our good old bishop; and we shall therefore have no scruple in re tracing our steps, if need be, in order to correct any mistakes and to supply any omissions to which our attention may be called by the kindness of better informed readers.

(To be continued.)

DEXTERITY.

A COLLOQUY.

A winter night. Three " reading men " seated round the fire in an attic room of Gengulphuhs College.

BLOUNT (looking up from his book).-Come, Wrangell, stir up the fire, man; I'm frozen stiff as a mummy.

WRANGELL (taking up the poker, and rai8ing his elbow for a vicious thrust at the coals, suddenly pauses, andc looking thoughtfully into the firefor several seconde).-Strange! wonderful! I shall be twenty-four years of age the tenth of next month, and yet the thought never once struck

me before. Another instance of how things, wonderful in themselves, fail to impress us, simply because they are common. A habit of

VOL. ix. No. 97. 29



382 Dexterity.

YAXPE (coming forward).-Infirm of purpose, give me the poker. (He takes the poker from Wrangell, and sends theflame roaring up the chimney.) Now what is this wonderful discovery you've made? Not that you will be twenty-four next birthday; something more pro found than that, surely. Come, out with it, whatever it is; but sans

phrase you know, Wrangell, for your moralising is very trying, and BLOUNT (interrupting).-By-the-way, Carpe, have you noticed that

Wrangell of late has fallen into an insufferable habit of composing essays on broomsticks ? I can't account for it. I am afraid he must have been (putting himself through a surreptitious course of Prover bial Philosophy.

WRANGELL.-Now, if you've quite done with compliments, I'll let you know my discovery. It is simply this. When Blount called on me to poke the fire, my left hand happened to be next the fireplace, yet I deliberately turned round at some inconvenience to myself, so as to take hold of the poker with my right hand. In a second it flashed on me like an inspiration, how wonderful that we shQuld all agree in

habitually using the right hand in preference to the left. C&rE. -And you seriously call that a discovery ?

WRANGELL.-A discovery for me, most decidedly; and I should think it's ten chances to one that neither you nor Blount have ever thought of the matter in this light before. You have each of you, hundreds of thousands of times, deliberately preferred your right hand to your left, without ever once pausing to ask yourselves, why?

BLOVmr.-Really, there's something in what Wrangell says. I can't remember that the strangeness of the practice ever struck me before. May I submit, that we make a preferential use of the right hand, simply because it's the most handy?

CAEPE.-Blount, don't be frivolous. To tell you the truth, Wrangell, if I had ;not taken to the study of Sir Thomas Browne, a

few months ago, I should never have thoughtbn the matter either. WuAxG=.-I wa-s not aware that Browne had discussed the ques

tion. CAnPr}}-He has, in a chapter of his "1 Vulgar Errors." But he

does not profess t0 have solved it, he has rather pointed out the great difficulties which lie in the way of any final solution. This is how he expresses himself, after enumerating many facts which seem to point to an innate superiority of the right hand :-" All which do seem to declare a natural preferment of the one unto motion before the other; wherein, notwithstanding, in submission to further information, we are unsatisfied unto great dubitation."

BLOur.-Which being interpreted CAnRE.-Means simply this, that, as Mr. Gladstone would say,

Browne keeps his mind open on the question. You see, Wrangell, I

give you none of Browne's arguments; so that you are free to strike



Dexterity. 383

out a new line of thought on this important subject, to go in and win single-handed, where the astute Sir Thomas has been baffled.

WxANGELL.-Let us then constitute ourselves a symposium for the

discussion of the question. First of all, we must have a clear state

ment of the problem. CARPE.-Yes, it is highly important to have the matter clearly set

before us; so I will make the opening statement. Man, an animal on two legs, without feathers, is furnished with two limbs, called arms, to all outward seeming perfectly similar in structure, symmetrically placed on the trunk in positions equally favourable to freedom of action, and provided with similar prehensile members, known as hands:

why does he habitually use one hand and arm-the right-in prefer ence to the other ?

BLOUNT.-Because the right hand and arm are more capable than

the left. WRANGEL.-I suppose we must descend to the level of your capa

city, Blount; so I would ask you, why are they more capable ? How can

you show us that you are not here confounding cause with effect ? May we not fairly attribute the actual superiority in strength and deft

ness of the right hand and arm to their careful training at the expense of the left hand and arm ? I don't believe physiologists can detect any difference in the structure or muscular development of an infant's hands or arms; if they could, the question would be settled once for all. I am inclined to think, for my part, that the weight of evidence is in

favour of the hypothesis that the preferential use of the right hand is

a purely artificial institution. Very young children, as far as I know, show no decided tendency to prefer one hand in action to the other; aid anything like a tendency to prefer the left to the right is at once

sappressed by their elders. The left hand and arm don't get fair play.

I appeal to you, Carpe and Blount, whether this be not the case? Have you not seen your mothers, again and again, reprove your younger brothers and sisters whenever, in their childish ignorance of social conventions, they fell naturally to scooping up their bread and

milk with a spoon held in the left hand, or to cutting their meat with a knife held in the same sinister grasp?

CARPE.-Not so fast, Wrangell. You're begging the whole ques

tion at the outset, when, by implication, you describe right-handedness as a social convention and left-handedness ;as natural. But I'm will ing to concede that young children show no decided inclination to use one hand in preference to the other; and I may tell you that Sir Thomas Browne here, after carefully examining the physiological evi dence on the question, sees no sufficient reason for deriving the pre

ferential use of the right hand and arm from any weakness or defect in the left arm or left side of the body. W oGaL.-Very well, then; the ground Is getting pretty well

cleared now, and



384 Dexterity.

BLOT (interrupting).-Perhaps we use one hand in preference to the other, because it is found very convenient to have uniformity of action in different persons, and to have one hand trained to a pitch of skill and strength which could never be attained in either hand by an indiscriminate use of both.

CAnrE.-That looks like a happy thought for you, Blount, but it's

really quite wide of the mark. Your radically illogical mind has a rare knack of missing the fine point of an argument. The whole ques tion at issue is not why men train one of their hands rather than the other, but why they universally select one particular hand-the right to be trained in preference to the other. If your theory were true, we should expect to find left-handed men as nuimerous as right-handed

WRANGELL (striking in).-As I was about to remark, when Blount interrupted me, there are only two possible hypotheses on the matter -the superiority of the right hand is natural, or it is acquired. Now, the weight of the evidence brought forward in the discussion, so far, is clearly on the side of the second hypothesis. Public opinion, as we have seen, will permit no left-handedness---(He pauses and looks into the fire, thoughtfully, for some seconds).

BLOUNT (raising his hand deprecatingly to Carpe).-IHush! not a breath from you, Carpe. The logical afflatus has descended upon

Wrangell. Yet a few moments, and we shall have an irrefragable theory of the origin of dexterity.

WRANGELL.-From your point of view, Blount, what you say is, I think, perfectly just. I am prepared to enounce forthwith a theory irrefragable, at least, to your sledge-hammer common sense. All I ask isthis, Carpe: let it be granted, for the sake of argument, that dexterity is acquired.

(nRPE.-Perge, Goodman Wrangell, your assumption is granted. Methinks I see a reductio ad absurdum looming in the distance.

WRAGGELL.-Not exactly that, though my line of argument may seem to take that form, to a certain extent. You, Blount, may resume your Deschanel's Physics where you left off; this being a matter of pure philosophy, hopelessly remote from any practical application, we cannot expect you to take aa interest in it.

BLOnr1.-Nevertheless, I think I shall watch the proceedings in the interests of common sense.

WRANGELL.-We assme, then, that dexterity is acquired; it is a usage universal, and venerable, perhaps, beyond all other usages.

CARPE.-Two astounding, brand-new assumptions, dexterity uni versal and from all time. Don't you condescend to any proof ?

WRmNGELL.-If yoU hold the contrary, the onus probandi clearly lies

with you; for though no collection of instances of right-handed nations, however numerous, would amount to absolute proof of the universality I have assumed, a single well-authenticated instance of a left-handed nation would be sufficient disproof. Bring forward, if you can, one such



Dexterity. 385

instance, and I withdraw the assertion of universality. Your silence tells me you cannot; so I will now proceed to give evidence as to the im

mense antiquity of the usage. Passing over, as quite too recent, the many examples of right-handed action in Greek sculpture, just trip up the stream of time with me, for a matter of some three thousand years, to the palmy days of Nineveh, and look at these bas-reliefs on its palace-walls. You, Carpe, have an illustrated copy of Bonomi's Nine veh on your shelf; hand it down to me. (Opening the book.) Look at these fac-simile drawings. What do you see here but warriors wield ing the spear and the sword, and drawing the bow, just as we should do, with the right hand? Then, again, see all the allusions to right handedness in the Hebrew Scriptures. You remember how David says in the Psalms -" If I forget thee, 0 Jerusalem, let my right hand forget her cunning." Then, centuries earlier, we have the usage again referred to in the name Benjamin-the son of the right hand

in the 35th chapter of Genesis. Is this enough for your sceptical mind, Carpe, or shall I go on piling up more evidence?

CARPE.-Really, Wrangell, your audacity exceeds the limits of decency. You scrape together some three or four historical instances of right-handedness, and then coolly talk of having piled up evidence. However, I'm so impatient to see your argument developed that, pro visionally, at least, I grant you these two very large assumptions-the prevalence of right-handedness everywhere and in all ages.

WRJGE.-If you grant me the everywhere, thats enough; for the universality of a particular usage must, in fact, lead us to infer a single source for that usage. So, in our quest of the origin of dex terity, we grope back link by link along the chain of tradition, from child to parent, and grand-parent for thousands of years until the tradition is run to earth at last in our "universal mother " Eve, or, to make the final step, our first parent Adam? Adam then

CARPE (interrupting.)-Wait a moment, I see Blount struggling with some great thought. Let us hear him; if not instructive, he is sure to be amusing.

BLOUNT.-YOU logicians are getting so bitterly sarcastic that I begin to think my common sense is getting the better of your preten tious logic. What I want to ask you, Wrangell, is this: How do you know that the right-hand referred to in the Hebrew Scriptures is the same hand we now call the right ? May not the Hebrew word be used merely to point out the hand preferred in action by the Jews, and how can you prove that that hand may not have been the one we now call the left ?

WLARGELJ,.-I shall not go into any philological discussion on the

point. That is BLOUNT.-No, of course not, because you know as much of

Hebrew as I do, and that's precisely nothing.



386 Dexterity.

WRANGELL.-I shall not, I repeat, go into the discussion of the Hebrew word translated " right hand" in the English version-that is not necessary. If you had listened to my argument, you would have seen that I have already derived dexterity by unbroken tradi tion from a single source. To suppose, as you would have us do, that at some one point, that tradition might have transmuted left-hancded ness into right-handedness, only shows that you have a very peculiar notion of what the word tradition means. Your objection, in fact, is ex hypothe8i absurd. To come back to our argument, however, I have already run the tradition to earth in our first parent Adam. Adam

then, mediately, no doubt, through jhis consort Eve, trained up his children Cain and Abel in the preferential use of the right-hand. But why did he do so? Obviously, because he himself made that preferential use of the right hand. Once again and finally, why did Adam do so ? To this last question there are but three answers possible in my opinion. Adam took to the preferential use of his right hand, first, because he was divinely instructed to that effect; second, because some accidental circumstance, say, for instance, an injury to his left hand or arm, compelled him for a lengthened period to make exclusive, or nearly exclusive use of the right hand, and thus so heavily handicapped the left in the race for strength and deftness that it was never able to pull up on the right; or, third, because Adam's right hand was by nature more capable than the left. Now, I assume, Carpe and Blount, that neither of you will seriously support the first hypo

thesis, Adam's divine instruction in right-handedness; for, I think, it is clear that man was left quite free to modify or develop his physical capacities as he pleased. We dismiss, then, hypothesis number one, and pass on to number two. This looks plausible enough at first sight. If Adam were to break his left arm, say, so as to weaken it or unfit it for action permanently, or for any considerable length of time, no doubt he would necessarily become a right-handed man. But would he ever come to instruct Eve or his children into right-handedness ?

For any solution, to be satisfactory, must account at once for the trans mission of the usage as well as for its origin.

BLOuNT.-The second hypothesis, to my mind, is quite satisfactory. Adam, having accidentally acquired the usage, would, of course, im

pose it on Eve, and through her on their children, because his sense of

fitness would be shocked by the awkwardness, or, to put it better, the want of conformity with his practice in Eve's left-handedness or ambi

dexterity. WRANGELL.-Totally wrong as usual, Blount. Adam, I maintain,

would always look on his right-handedness, so acquired, as a defect; and far from endeavouring to discourage Eve in the use of her left

hand, he would, no doubt, regard her as a being superior to him in so

far as she possessed a more capable left hand. No man not fiendishly



Dexterity. 387

ill-natured would attempt to force his own physical defects on his wife

and children; and as a physical defect Adam, I repeat, could not but regard the comparative incapacity of his left hand. The second hypo thesis, then, must be dismissed with the first; for though fully ade

quate to account for the origin of dexterity, it is unable to account for its transmission.

My argument, you see, Carpe, is almost complete; having rejected hypotheses number one and two, we are forced to accept number three as the only remaining hypothesis possible. To put the matter in strict logical form for you, we have the question narrowed to the fol lowing disjunctive syllogism in the medis tollendo ponens:

Dexterity arises either from A, or B, or C. It does not arise from A or from B; .I. t arises from C.

Substituting for C its equivalent, hypothesis number three, the conclusion is, that dexterity arises from a natural superiority in the right hancd and arm. So Adam was a right-hanrded man by nature;

and what our first assumption led us to regard as unbroken tradition, is, in truth, only persistent inherency. The progress of physiological research will, no doubt, show us at some future day, to what subtle structural peculiarities we must attribute this natural superiority of

the right hand; meanwhile, the honour of having first among all in

quirers demonstrated by invincible logic, the existence of that mysteri ous natural superiority is mine and mine only. (The chavel clock chimes

midnight.) CARPE (starting up from his chair).-There's twelve o'clock alreadcy,

so away with you both to your rooms; I must get to bed. To-morrow night, Wrangell, I'll tear into shreds the amazing tissue of fallacies and unwarranted assumptions you've been weaving for the last half hour.

BLOUNT.-Don't reckon on any help from me, Carpe. I'll read in

my own rooms from henceforth until you and Wrangell have come

back to your senses. Seriously, though, Wrangell, I wonder what is the origin of right-handedness.

WRANGELL.-Don't think to nettle me, Blount; I have not been

fool enough to fancy for a moment that I could penetrate your armour plated intellect with the delicate shafts of my logic. My argument,

you may recollect, was addressed to Carpe only. BLOUNT.-The discussion, at all events, has been a suggestive one,

suggesting to me, inter alia, the reflection, that many a saner reasoner

than you might be found among the inmates of Hanley Asylum.

Come, give me your arm across the quadrangle, I feel a little faint

after that disjunctive syllogism. (Ereunt Blount and Wrangell.) CAnRr.-A most astounding fellow, that Wrangell! A man can



388 The Little Newsboy.

never tell whether he is in earnest or joking; and I shouldn't be

surprised to find that this dexterous argument of his is only meant

as a ponderous piece of wit at the expense of logicians. (Retires to his

bedroom.) N. C.

THE LITTLE NEWSBOY.

T IS New York sketch does not, like our friend " Widow Melville," cross the Atlantic expressly for our use and benefit. We remember

a little story about a girl selling matchess, which gave us a vivid notion of what tragedies we may pass in the streets day by day. With the hope of exciting some such feelings, we find room for the following.

% **% %_

Hurrying to catch a certain tramcar at a certain corner, late one stormy night, I was suddenly arrested by the sight of a queer looking bundle lying in a doorway.

" Bless my heart ! it's a child! Oh, John, I'm afraid he's frozen !" I exclaimed to my brother, as we both bent over the bundle.

Such a little fellow as he was, in the big ragged coat; such a tired baby face under the fuzzy cap; such a purple little hand, still holding fast a few papers; such a pathetic sight altogether was the boy, lying on the stone step, with the snow drifting over him, that it was im possible to go by.

" He is asleep, but he'll freeze if left so, long. Here, wake up, my boy, and go home as fast as you can," cried John, with a gentle shake and a very gentle voice; for the memory of a dear lad safely tucked up at home made him fatherly kind to the small vagabond.

The moment he was touched, the boy tumbled up, and before he

was half awake began his usual cry with an eye to business. "Paper, sir? Heral' / Freeman! Last-" a great gap followed up

the "last edition" and he stood blinking at us like a very chilly young owl.

" I'll buy them all, if you go home, my little chap; it's high time

you were abed," said John, whisking the damp papers into one pocket and his purse out of another as he spoke.

"All of 'em?' why, there's six!" croaked the boy, for he was

hoarse as a raven. "Never mind, I can kindle a fire with them; put that in your

pocket and trot home as fast as possible."



dexterity. a colloquy

Documents