Saturday press. [volume] (Honolulu, H.I.) 1880-1885, 1884-12-20

7
the native vigor OF the animal is the
cause Of its continued existence. then
il is sufficient to account for that exist
cnce, and any other explanation is
superfuous. Any further inquiries (as
whence the vigor ? are perfectly If.
relevant. That too is the result of ma
tural selection-if the existence OF such
principle be allowed.
The truth is, the two explanations
are mutually exclusive. They cannot
possibly coexist as coordinated grounds
Of the same phenomenon. If an animal
is preserved because it is adapted to its
environment, that result must proceed
whether there be controlling intell.
gence or not The truth Of evolution
is not here under discussion but,
assuming its truth, its bearings on other
truth
The postulates Of the evolutionist in
this branch of the doctrine, are but two
-"the tendency to vary" and "natural
selection" 1t is obvious that the mere
tendency to vary is no evidence Of
design, since we would be utterly un-
able to say in advance whether such
tendency wonld be likely to exist or not
The argument then above outlined, is
now complete. The only answer Of
which it admits, viz. that the tendency
to vary though not alone proof Of design
yet, taken in connection with the results
of natural selection, does constitute
such proof, is, to my mind, petihs
PyindPn too palpable to require refuta-
ton
Another reason there is, perhaps
still more obvious, going to show that
evolution abolishes design. 1t regards
mind as product. Now it seems in
consistent and irrational to regard that
as cause and ground Of all being
which is itself late product and de
velopment of other and earlier forms
and which is in fact merely an acquired
function consequent upon higher or
ganization of earlier types. There is
an old metaphysical maxim which some
may deemapplicable here. "Nothingcan
be evolved which has not been first
involved" But the only application Of
which this proposition here admits is
manifestly an absurd one. The cause
must Of course be adequate to the effect;
but it need not and does not possess
the qualities of that effect, or the two
could not be Disseminated. The
scheme Of things it is true must have
been adequate to the development Of
mind as function, but that function
may not have existed before it was
evolved.
We are next to consider the relation
of evolution to positive or dogmatic
philosophy. And here, | take issue fun
damentally, with the ordinary evolution
ist. Evolution is in no sense substi
tute for philosophy 1t stops just where
philosophy proper begins. It's the high
est generalization of science, but OF
science merely and is unworthy
to enter the portals Of that temple
the altars Of whose goddess it has
SO ruthlessly profaned. If the wor-
ship of philosophy be indeed futile, il
her ear be indeed deaf to the petitions
of her followers, if the fires on her al.
tars do really burn in vain, then lei
those flames be extinguished, those
massive doors be closed, and the
abode of the inscrutable deity be rele-
gated once more to the aboriginal dark
ness which the eye Of man has sought
vainly to penetrate. But let not those
sacred shrines by violated nor those
mysteries profaned, by horde who
understand not their .purport and value
The majority of evolutionists seem
to imagine that their theory contains
the sum of all truth, and is a full
and satisfactory explanation of those
problems which in reality makes no ef-
fort to solve. am aware that evolution
may be connected with dogmatic be-
lief But then it becomes material
ism Of the most obvious kind. 1t abol-
ishes the primitive opposition Of mind
and matter, spirit and nature, thought
and extension, and substitute in it:
stead an absolute monism. But the
doctrine most naturally connects itsel
with hopeless agnosticism, denial O
the possibility of philosophy. Ane
here l must think that Mr.. SCOTS def
milton breaks down. This form Of evo
luton knows nothing Of ''matter" O.
"force" with "inherent qualities" 1
cannot sly how things by 'inheren
properties in themselves, have come Il
be as they are" Alas no if it coult
do that much, perhaps this fine hypoth
esis might breathe some whisper as t.
what we are and whittier we are has
tening But no, on this theme, it is 81
lent 1t tells us only Of the empirica
relation Of phenomena in time, ane
that is all. No absolute truth ; no i'm
movable foundations no inquiry int.
causes-into the first great cause nj
glance deep down into the mystery o
things. And this is Mr.. SCOTS "mag
uifcent schcmep This is the though
which "dazzles" his imagination ! Thi
is the conception which surpasses il
grandeur every other since creation
dawned Alas for the unsphered spiri
Of Plato, il this he true. Alas for tn
mighty Stagyrite, for the shade Of Em
manuel Kant, for Plotinus, Spinoza
Coleridge, and all the mighty process
sion Of earnest truth seekers from An
+ axagoras to Sir William Hamilton, VIII
! dropped their plumJnets down tn
broad deep universe" bravely seeking
at least some emergent reality, SOM
! truth which might awake to perisl
never" which nothing, could "utterl
! abolish or destroy"
, II Evolution cannot solve these pre-
: blems then let her sit down in decen
> humility, and not aaunt her shallo'
: empiricism in the face Of univers
! whose mysteries she is powerless I,