HANDICAPPING INTELLECT IN THE ARMY.
THE Committee which has been considering the subject of the importance to be attached to athletic prowess in reference to the profession of arms has reported, we find, in favour of adding to the 4,000 marks now allowed for merit in intellectual subjects, 1,200 marks for merit in athletic exercises, the subjects of test to be any three of the following,—walking, running, riding, swimming, leaping, and gymnastic exercises. In other words, the total of marks to be gained for a commis- sion in the Army will now be 5,200, instead of 4,000, and of these, 1,200 will be attainable by men of strong physique, without reference to intellectual qualities. Now, the question is whether this recommendation is wise or unwise. And this depends on the further question how far it is desirable to handicap mere intelligence, when not combined with a highly developed physique, in the competition for the profession of arms. Now, of course, those persons who really believe—as a respected correspondent of our own maintained in these columns three weeks ago—that "bodily strength and dexterity are at least as valuable to the soldier as the power of readily acquiring a foreign language," will quite rightly accept this recommendation of the Committee, mid ask for its adoption. But we confess we regard that opinion with pure amazement. It is quite true, indeed, that a physical pass examination is most desirable,--that it is most desirable to exclude men who are likely to break down from physical causes, even though amongst them there might, by way of exception, be somebody or other who, in spite of all physical defects, would make a General of the first order of genius. Of course in the chances of life such a thing might occur, and if it did occur, the physical rule would probably have cost us more than it was at all worth. But then such a chance is too small to out- weigh the clear benefit of the rule, and we do not in the least deny that the possession of the requisite physical qualities is a matter of the first importance to a professional soldier. But there we stop. We cannot in the least admit that the possession of more than average physical qualities is a matter of great importance to a soldier, or one to be weighed for an instant against the power of acquiring a foreign language, and understanding the literature and the people to which a foreign language is the key. In fact, the knowledge of a modern language, and the power to acquire it, seems to us to involve all sorts of capacities most useful to a soldier ; while athleticism involves—to an officer at least—exceedingly few. What the officer wants is power of command, self-confidence, intelligence, elasticity of mind, quickness in understanding men, a happy art of inspiring them with confidence and respect, and of course all kinds of professional knowledge. Now what we suspect to be the error of those who attach so much import- ance to the athletic capabilities of intending officers, is the notion that great athletic qualities test in a high degree the owner's self-confidence in the field and his power of command over his men. To our mind, no greater error could be made. Daring, courage, moral initiative, are, we admit, of the very first importance for self-confidence and the faculty of com- mand. But daring, courage, and moral initiative are almost
wholly mental qualities. So far as courage is a mere indifference to danger, it may be rather a quality of the physical temperament than of the mind. But even this is but very slightly more likely to be found in a man who can ride or swim or run or leap well, than in a man who can do none of these things more than indifferently. No doubt, the taste for anything like violent exercise implies muscular as well as out-of-doors tastes, and muscular and out-of-doors tastes are rarely found in physically timid men. Still, the ab- sence of marked tastes of this kind is very far indeed from even suggesting timidity ; so that the most that can be said is that while the presence of such tastes probably im- plies that a man is not timid, the absence of such tastes by no means implies that he is. This goes a little way, indeed, but a very little way, towards securing the possession of any im- portant quality for an officer in the Army,—and is of the less importance, even so far as it does go, because the mere selection of the Army as a profession naturally weeds out a good many of the pure book-worms and of the physically timid, to whom the idea of entering such a profession would never occur.
But true self-confidence, true dauntlessness, and above all, true initiative,—which, as we admit, are of the highest possible importance to an officer in the Army—are cer- tainly not to be tested in the faintest possible way by physical tests, nor do we know of any quality of value which is,—unless, perhaps, it be to sonic slight extent evi- dence of habits of life which enable a man to enter better than any intellectual pursuit would, into the character and wants of the common soldier. With this possible exception, we should attach indefinitely more importance to any evidence of the moral or intellectual intelligence and alertness of a candidate for the Army, than to any conceivable gymnastic prowess.
And the vice of this recommendation of the Committee is that it proposes to handicap intelligence and knowledge heavily in favour of mere physical vigour. To allow nearly a quarter of the full marks attainable, for skill in such pursuits as riding, swimming, and leaping, is to enable a man to get half-marks with exceedingly little evidence of intelligence indeed. By getting only 1,400 out of the 4,000 marks for intellectual subjects— that is, little more than a third—and full marks for athletics, a candidate will rank with one who had got 2,600 marks for the subjects requiring mental study, or about two-thirds of the whole marks given for those subjects. Now every examiner knows the vast difference between the intelligence, capacity, and industry of a man who gets two- thirds marks for his subjects and one who gets one-third marks,—a difference which, as it seems to us, the evidence of out-of-doors tastes supplied by excellence in athletic pur- suits, is utterly unworthy to compensate. The taste for out-of-doors pursuits may or may not be, on the whole, useful to an officer. Often it will be, often it will not be. But pliancy and breadth of mind, the power to acquire new notions of either the characters or the situations amongst which a man is placed, must always be of the first importance to an officer. These qualities,—like all mental qualities,—are useful under a vast variety of different circumstances, and in a vast variety of different ways, which it is quite impossible beforehand to foresee or calculate. The essence of the difference between mental qualities and physical qualities is, indeed, precisely this,—that you know beforehand pretty nearly the kind of circumstances under which great physical qualities are useful, —and which, for a man in command of others, and in modern life, are not very numerous. But you never know how a general power of intelligence, how even any particular mental capacity, may aid the service in which an officer is engaged. The number of ways in which it may do so is simply inexhaustible. Every such quality implies a new kind of adaptability to the universe, a new aptness in dealing with events, which may always turn out of incalculable value.
Now, what English officers mainly want is certainly this adaptability. They are too often a brave, but a narrow-minded set of men, who do not understand the novel conditions of things, and almost pride themselves 9n not understanding them. They need verve, they need tact, they need swiftness of thought. But every kind of intellectual culture, and especially those kinds which add to the knowledge of men,—aid in developing tact and the rapidity of mental processes, and are therefore of in- calculable use to our officers. That these qualities should be handicapped for the sake of mere proficients in riding, walk- ing, and swimming, and such like exercises, seems to us one of the worst and most foolish recommendations which a Committee of our times has ever made.
Previous page
