New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1876-09-19
THE LECTURE.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN: We live and follow the
path of system of things Of immense diversity and
perplexty which VIC call nature. and it is matter
of the deepest interest to all of that we should
form Just conceptions of the constitution Of that
system and of its past history. With relation to
this universe is in extent little more than
mathematical point, in duration but feeting
shadow. He is n reed shaken in the winds of force
but, as Pascal long ago remarked, although reed.
he is thinking reed, and, in virtue of that wonder
full capacity Of thought, he has power Of framing
to himself a symbolic conception of the universe,
which, although doubtless highly imperfect, and
although wholly inadequate as picture OF that
great Whole, yet is sufficient to serve him as Q
gudc-boOk in his practical affairs. 1t has taken
long indeed and accumulations Of often huitless
Labor to enable TO look steadily at the glazing
phantasmagoria of nature, to notice her fluctuations
and what is regular among her apparent iTTegulari
ties aud it is only comparatively lately, within the
last few centuries, that there has emerged the
ceptlon of pervading order aud definite force Of
Things, which we torn tho course Of nature. lAt
this point cries of "Louderl louderw which had
been uttered once beforelpow became general, and
a gentleman called from the back of the hall, 1--WE
can't hear word you say" 70 which tho lecturer re-
sponded by saying If my audience will be so kind
rs to be seated that difficulty will be largely re-
moved" He then resumed his lectuTe in tone Of
voice scarcely raised but more audible on account
of the instant hushing of noise and novcments.l
Bat ont of this contemplation Of nature and out
of mans thought concerning her. there has IN these
later times arisen that conception Of the cOnstancy
of nature to which / have referred, and at
length that has become the guiding conception of
modern thought. 1t has ceased to be almost con-
ceiyable to any person who has pdid attention to
hot anvt 1laca
in the Universe or that events should follow any
thing but the natural order of cause and effect. We
have como TO look upon the present the child Of
the past and the parent Of the future and as we
have excluded chance from any share part in the
order of things, so in the present order Of nature
men have come 20 neglect, as a possibility, the
notion of any interference with that order and
whatever may be mems speculative notions upon
these points, it is quite certain that every irtellI
gent person guides his life and risks his fortune
upon the belief that the order of nature is constant,
and the relation of cause 10 effect unchanged.
THE QUESTION A HISTORICAL ONE.
In fact; there is no belief which entertain
which has so complete logical basis as that to
which have just referred. 1t underes tacitly
every process Of reasoning; it is the foundation OF
every act of tho will. 1t is based upon the broadcast
induction, aud it is verified by the most constant,
regular, ana UNIVERSAL OF lnuuCIl'o pIOCeSSoS "o
must recollect that any human belief, however
broad its basis however defensible it may seem, is,
after all only probable belief and that our broad
est congratulations are simply tho highest de-
grec3 of probability. Though we arc quite
clear about the cOnstancy of nature at the
present time, and in the present oriec Of things.
it by 10 means follows necessarily that we are
justified in expanding this generalization into the
past and in denying absolutely that there may have
been time when evidence did not follow first
order, when the relations of cause and effect
were not fixed aud definite, and when external
agencies did not intervene in the general course OF
nature. Cautious men Will admit that siich change
in the order of nature may have been possible Just
as every candid thinker will admit that there may
be Il world in which two and two do not make four,
and in which two straight lines 90 not nelose
u space. In fact this question with which
have to deal in tho three lectures shall have the
honor Of delivering before you, this question as TO
the past order of nature, is essentially historical
question, aud it is ono that must be dealt with in
the same way as any historical problem
WILL il you please, in the first place, state to you
what are the views which have been entertained re;
speeding the order Of nature in the past and then
will consider what eyidchce Is in our possession bear
ing upon the question, and by what light of crit-
cism that evidence is 10 bo interpreted. So far as
know, there are only three vicws-.hTec hypothesis
which ever have been entertained, which we'd
be entertained, respecting the past history OF
nature.
HYPOTHESIS RESPECTING THE ORDER or NATURE.
Upon the first of these the assumption is that the
order of nature which now obtains has always OBJ
taincd in other words, that the present course Of
nature the present order OF things has existed from
all eternity. The second hypothesis is that the
present state Of things the present order of nature
has had only limited duration, and that ct some
period in the past tho state of things which
VIC now know substantially, though not OF
course in all its details. but the state OF
things which VIZ now know. arose and caris
into existence without any precedent similar
coudit,on from which it could have proceeded
The third hypothess also assumes that the pressns
order OF nature has had but limited duras,os' D~
n sunnosos that the present ordor OF thhtn ~
ceeied Inv a natural process from an anteceeensS
- enS Anal fran another anteceaent order ano y