This makes a worthy and admirable attack on the problem of bringing mutual understanding, to those who practice the sciences and those who practice in the humanities. The author, an organic chemist, believes that ""a real union of the sciences and enable men to agree on what is practical, moral and just"". He attempts to explain each to each in a practical way by first examining a poem and a formula from physics a side by side, discussing their differences and similarities. In following he enlarges further on the differences and similarity in the data and methods of the and the scientist. He indicates how breaches in understanding can be and present a much constructive thinking on how to bring the arts and the sciences into healthful interaction. However, his bias toward the scientific favors the scientist reader who will learn more of the nature of the arts, than the humanist reader who may not care to labor his way through the author's super-analytic prose. There is a failure of synthesis here that is a product of a too pedestrian style and over-worked linear argument that do not sufficiently illuminate the real unity underlying, his conceptions; yet, there is meat here for those specifically interested in the unification of knowledge. charts.