discipline closely linked to formal logic); (b) a strong case is made for the sciences of observation; (c) there are calls for a revival of mechanics ('hiyal'); and (d) from within mathematics itself, there is demand for a doubling of geometry courses at the expense of algebra. Thus, we find that the problem is deeper and more widespread than we had thought and that the root of the problem lies perhaps in our natural inclination to favour the subjective over the objective, which confirms the observations I made about the hypothetical example given at the beginning of this article. At this point, I would like to make an observation of a general nature, namely that the adoption of a theoretical approach, even if pushed to its limits, is not usually detrimental in countries where an experimental science establishment already exists. On the contrary, it increases their power. For this very reason, although the American model is often held up as an example to follow, it seems to me that it is an inappropriate one because, in my view, the United States today is more in need of philosophers than scientists. The theoretical approach, however, is harmful in countries that lack experience in the field of natural science and laboratory experimentation. This is because they are held captive by their own subjectivism, under the influence of ideas which, though outwardly scientific and modern, are in fact other-worldly and antiquated. It is no surprise that there are Indians and Arabs who excel in modem algebra, however remote this discipline might now be from its older form. Neither is it surprising to see them discover hidden truths in new-found schemes of numbers and letters. However, within the context of wealth creation, what they need is practice in trigonometry and the like, that is, to translate numbers of all kinds into geometrical shapes. Rather than mere verbal expression, therefore, what is required to achieve this result is comprehensive and balanced training of the mind, the eye and the hand.