IV

_Can it be that the Cosmic Process has no Relation to Moral Ends?_

But as long as we confine our attention to the universal struggle for

life and the survival of the fittest, without certain qualifications

presently to be mentioned, it is difficult for the most profound

intelligence to arrive at conclusions much more satisfactory than

Caliban's. If the spirit shown in Nature's works as thus contemplated is

not one of wanton mockery, it seems at any rate to be a spirit of stolid

indifference. It indicates a Blind Force rather than a Beneficent Wisdom

at the source of things. It is in some such mood as this that Huxley

tells us, in his famous address delivered at Oxford, in 1893, that there

is no sanction for morality in the Cosmic Process. "Men in society," he

says, "are undoubtedly subject to the cosmic process. As among other

animals, multiplication goes on without cessation and involves severe

competition for the means of support. The struggle for existence tends

to eliminate those less fitted to adapt themselves to the circumstances

of their existence. The strongest, the most self-assertive, tend to

tread down the weaker.... Social progress means a checking of the cosmic

process at every step and the substitution for it of another, which may

be called the ethical process; the end of which is not the survival of

those who may happen to be the fittest, in respect of the whole of the

conditions which exist, but of those who are ethically the best." Again,

says Huxley, "let us understand, once for all, that the ethical progress

of society depends, not on imitating the cosmic process, still less in

running away from it, but in combating it." And again he tells us that

while the moral sentiments have undoubtedly been evolved, yet since

"the immoral sentiments have no less been evolved, there is so far as

much natural sanction for the one as for the other." And yet again, "the

cosmic process has no sort of relation to moral ends."

When these statements were first made they were received with surprise,

and they have since called forth much comment, for they sound like a

retreat from the position which an evolutionist is expected to hold.

They distinctly assert a breach of continuity between evolution in

general and the evolution of Man in particular; and thus they have

carried joy to the hearts of sundry theologians, of the sort that like

to regard Man as an infringer upon Nature. If there is no natural

sanction for morality, then the sanction must be supernatural, and

forthwith such theologians greet Huxley as an ally!

They are mistaken, however. Huxley does not really mean to assert any

such breach of continuity as is here suggested. In a footnote to his

printed address he makes a qualification which really cancels the group

of statements I have quoted. "Of course," says Huxley, "strictly

speaking, social life and the ethical process, in virtue of which it

advances toward perfection, are part and parcel of the general process

of evolution." Of course they are; and of course the general process of

evolution is the cosmic process, it is Nature's way of doing things. But

when my dear Huxley a moment ago was saying that the "cosmic process has

no sort of relation to moral ends," he was using the phrase in a more

restricted sense; he was using it as equivalent to what Darwin called

"natural selection," what Spencer called "survival of the fittest,"

which is only one part of the cosmic process. Now most assuredly

survival of the fittest, as such, has no sort of relation to moral ends.

Beauty and ugliness, virtue and vice, are all alike to it. Side by side

with the exquisite rose flourishes the hideous tarantula, and in too

many cases the villain's chances of livelihood are better than the

saints. As I said a while ago, if we confine our attention to the

survival of the fittest in the struggle for existence, we are not likely

to arrive at conclusions much more satisfactory than Caliban's

"As it likes me each time, I do: So He."

In such a universe we may look in vain for any sanction for morality,

any justification for love and self-sacrifice; we find no hope in it, no

consolation; there is not even dignity in it, nothing whatever but

resistless all-producing and all-consuming energy.

Such a universe, however, is not the one in which we live. In the cosmic

process of evolution, whereof our individual lives are part and parcel,

there are other agencies at work besides natural selection, and the

story of the struggle for existence is far from being the whole story. I

have thus far been merely stating difficulties; it is now time to point

out the direction in which we are to look for a solution of them. I

think it can be shown that the principles of morality have their roots

in the deepest foundations of the universe, that the cosmic process is

ethical in the profoundest sense, that in that far-off morning of the

world, when the stars sang together and the sons of God shouted for joy,

the beauty of self-sacrifice and disinterested love formed the chief

burden of the mighty theme.

[Illustration]

V

_First Stages in the Genesis of Man_

Let us begin by drawing a correct though slight outline sketch of what

the cosmic process of evolution has been. It is not strange that when

biologists speak of evolution they should often or usually have in mind

simply the modifications wrought in plants and animals by means of

natural selection. For it was by calling attention to such modifications

that Darwin discovered a true cause of the origin of species by

physiological descent from allied species. Thus was demonstrated the

fact of evolution in its most important province; men of science were

convinced that the higher forms of life are derived from lower forms,

and the old notion of special creations was exploded once and forever.

This was a great scientific achievement, one of the greatest known to

history, and it is therefore not strange that language should often be

employed as if Evolutionism and Darwinism were synonymous. Yet not only

are there extensive regions in the doctrine of evolution about which

Darwin knew very little, but even as regards the genesis of species his

theory was never developed in his own hands so far as to account

satisfactorily for the genesis of man.

It must be borne in mind that while the natural selection of physical

variations will go far toward explaining the characteristics of all the

plants and all the beasts in the world, it remains powerless to account

for the existence of man. Natural selection of physical variations might

go on for a dozen eternities without any other visible result than new

forms of plant and beast in endless and meaningless succession. The

physical variations by which man is distinguished from apes are not

great. His physical relationship with the ape is closer than that

between cat and dog, which belong to different families of the same

order; it is more like that between cat and leopard, or between dog and

fox, different genera in the same family. But the moment we consider the

minds of man and ape, the gap between the two is immeasurable. Mr.

Mivart has truly said that, with regard to their total value in nature,

the difference between man and ape transcends the difference between ape

and blade of grass. I should be disposed to go further and say, that

while for zo÷logical man you can hardly erect a distinct family from

that of the chimpanzee and orang, on the other hand, for psychological

man you must erect a distinct kingdom; nay, you must even dichotomize

the universe, putting Man on one side and all things else on the other.

How can this overwhelming contrast between psychical and physical

difference be accounted for? The clue was furnished by Alfred Russel

Wallace, the illustrious co-discoverer of natural selection. Wallace

saw that along with the general development of mammalian intelligence a

point must have been reached in the history of one of the primates, when

variations of intelligence were more profitable to him than variations

in body. From that time forth that primate's intelligence went on by

slow increments acquiring new capacity, while his body changed but

little. When once he could strike fire, and chip a flint, and use a

club, and strip off the bear's hide to cover himself, there was clearly

no further use in thickening his own hide, or lengthening and sharpening

his claws. Natural selection is the keenest capitalist in the universe;

she never loses an instant in seizing the most profitable place for

investment, and her judgment is never at fault. Forthwith, for a million

years or more she invested all her capital in the psychical variations

of this favoured primate, making little change in his body except so far

as to aid in the general result, until by and by something like human

intelligence of a low grade, like that of the Australian or the Andaman

islander, was achieved. The genesis of humanity was by no means yet

completed, but an enormous gulf had been crossed.

After throwing out this luminous suggestion Mr. Wallace never followed

it up as it admitted and deserved. It is too much to expect one man to

do everything, and his splendid studies in the geographical distribution

of organisms may well have left him little time for work in this

direction. Who can fail to see that the selection of psychical

variations, to the comparative neglect of physical variations, was the

opening of a new and greater act in the drama of creation? Since that

new departure the Creator's highest work has consisted not in bringing

forth new types of body, but in expanding and perfecting the psychical

attributes of the one creature in whose life those attributes have begun

to acquire predominance. Along this human line of ascent there is no

occasion for any further genesis of species, all future progress must

continue to be not zo÷logical, but psychological, organic evolution

gives place to civilization. Thus in the long series of organic beings

Man is the last; the cosmic process, having once evolved this

masterpiece, could thenceforth do nothing better than to perfect him.

[Illustration]