The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1882-06-14
Professor Lionel Beale, F R. S., on
Modern Scientific Thought.

A crowded meeting of the members
of the Victoria (Philosophica) Institute,
"a Society founded to investigate all
scientific questions, including any said to
initiate against Religious Belief-took
place at No. 7, Adelphi Terrace, London,
on the 18th of May, when Professor
Lionel Beale, F. R. S., President (19S1) of
the Microscopical Society, read paper.
He commenced by abiding to the varied
opinions that existed among scientific
men, as to whether the hypothesis upon
which modern scientific opinion in favor
of some form of the physical doctrine of
life were based are worthy of acceptance.
He himself confessed that he was among
those who held that no form of the
hypothesis which attributes the phenom-
ena OF the living world to mere mattel
and its properties has been, or can be-
justified by reason" He added"
would draw attention to the declaration
again and again repeated, and now
taught even to children, that the living
and the non-living differ only in degree,
that the living has been evolved by de-
grees from the non-living, and that the
latter passes by gradations towards the
evidence in proof of these conclusions,
which are, in fact, dictatorial assertions
only, and no specimen of any kind of
matter which is actually passing from the
non-living to the living state, or which
can be shown to establish any connexion
between these absolutely different condi-
tions of matter, has been, or can be at
this time, brought forward. Between
purely vital and purely physical actions
not the faintest analogy has been shown
to exist. The living world is absolutely
distinct from the non-iving world, and,
instead Of being a necessary outcome Of
it, is, compared with the antiquity of mat
ter, probably very recent addition to
! it,-not, of course, an addition of mere
transformed or modified matter and en-
leroy, hut of transcendent power conferred
on matter which controls, regulates. and
manages both matter and its forces ac-
cording it may be, to laws, but not the
laws of inert matter 1t is not only one
or two of the positions assumed by the
materialist that are open to doubt or
objection. Facts completely controvert
all materialistic views which have been
put forward. To be condemned as I'M
tenable is the doctrine that there is
relationship between non-Iiving and liv-
ing matter, or that the term molecular
mechanism can be applied to the former.
The simple truth is, that the essential
! phenomena of al LIVING beings cannot be
explained without recourse to some hy-
pothesis Of power totally different from
any of the known forms or modes OF
energy. Any one who allows his reason
to be influenced by the facts of nature as
at present discovered will feel obliged to
admit the existence of vital power as
distinct from, and capable of controlling
the ordinary forces of non living matter
1t has been conclusively shown that the
laws of vital force or power are essential.
ly different from those by which ordinary
matter and its forces are governed. The
author then referred to Nature as ex-
| planned by the Materialist: A Nature
which was really blind, Unsuitable, ir-
resistible fate, falsely called law, desti-
tute of intelligence and reason, devoid OF
mercy and justice, is the Nature held up
for our admiration with the consoline
assurance Of dictatorial authority that il
| sprang from chaos in obedience to ever
lasting self-originating (D law, and that
it will return to chaos, in obedience to
the same-all life, and work, and thought
being but the fluctuations of .cosmic
nebulosity, and dependent upon the new
err ceasing gyrations of infinite, everlast-
ing atoms, as they bound through the
ages from void to void This, the dullest,
the narrowest, the most superficial of all
creeds, -materialism, which includes
some mixture of antitheism and atheism
Of various forms and hues,-has been
half accepted by hundreds of persons dur
ing the last few years. believe all
meterialistic doctrines, vary as they may
in detail will be found to agree in accent
ing as a truth if indeed, they are not
actually based on 1.-THE monstrous as
sumption that the living and the non
living are one, and that every living
thing is Just as much a machine as a
watch, or windmill, or hydraulic ap
paratus. According to the material con
tention, everything owes its existence TO
the properties of the material particles
out Of which it is constructed But is it
not strange that it never seems to have
occurred to the materialistic devotee that
neither the watch, nor the steam engine,
nor the windmill, nor the hydraulic APP
paratus, nor any other machine known
to, or made by any individual in this