,,first ,,principles4 ,,by ,,herbert ,,spencer1 ,,author ,,of 8,,social ,,statics10 8,,the ,,principles ,,of ,,psychology10 8,,essays3 ,,scientific1 ,,political1 ,,and ,,speculative10 8,,education10 ,,etc4 ,,second ,,thousand4 ,,london3 ,,williams ,,and ,,norgate1 #ad1 ,,henrietta ,,street1 ,,covent ,,garden4 #ahfc4 ,the ,right of ,translation is reserved4 ,,john ,,childs ,,and ,,son1 ,,printers4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,preface4 ,this volume is the first of a series described in a prospectus originally distributed in ,march1 #ahfj4 ,of that prospectus1 the annexed is a reprint4 ,a ,,system ,,of ,,philosophy4 ,mr4 ,herbert ,spencer proposes to issue in periodical parts a connected series of works which he has for several years been preparing4 ,some conception of the general aim and scope of this series may be gathered from the following ,programme4 ,,first ,,principles4 ,,part ,i4 ,,the ,,unknowable4--,carrying a step further the doctrine put into shape by ,hamilton and ,mansel2 pointing out the various directions in which ,science leads to the same conclusions2 and showing that in this united belief in an ,absolute that transcends not only human knowledge but human conception1 lies the only possible reconciliation of ,science and ,religion4 ,,part ,,ii4 ,,laws ,,of ,,the ,,knowable4--,a statement of the ultimate principles discernible throughout all manifestations of the ,absolute--those highest generalizations now being disclosed by ,science which are severally true not of one class of phenomena but of all classes of phenomena2 and which are thus the keys to all classes of phenomena4#a ,in logical order should here come the application of these ,first ,principles to ,inorganic ,nature4 ,but this great division it is proposed to pass over3 partly because1 even without it1 the scheme is too extensive2 and partly because the interpretation of ,organic ,nature after the proposed method1 is of more immediate importance4 ,the second work of the series will therefore be-- ,,the ,,principles ,,of ,,biology4 ,,vol4 ,i4 ,,part ,i4 ,,the ,,data ,,of ,,biology4--,including those general truths of ,physics and ,chemistry with which rational ,biology must set out4 ,,ii4 ,,the ,,inductions ,,of ,,biology4--,a statement of the leading generalizations which ,naturalists1 ,physiologists1 and ,comparative ,anatomists1 have established4 ,,iii4 ,,the ,,evolution ,,of ,,life4--,concerning the speculation commonly known as 8,the ,development ,hypothesis0--its priori and posteriori evidences4 ,,vol4 ,,ii4 ,,iv4 ,,morphological ,,development4--,pointing out the relations that are everywhere traceable between organic forms and the average of the various forces to which they are subject2 and seeking in the cumulative effects of such forces a theory of the forms4 ,v4 ,,physiological ,,development4--,the progressive differentiation of functions similarly traced2 and similarly interpreted as consequent upon the exposure of different parts of organisms to different sets of conditions4 ,,vi4 ,,the ,,laws ,,of ,,multiplication4--,generalizations respecting the rates of reproduction of the various classes of plants and animals2 followed by an attempt to show the dependence of these variations upon certain necessary causes4#b ,,the ,,principles ,,of ,,psychology4 ,,vol4 ,i4 ,,part ,i4 ,,the ,,data ,,of ,,psychology4--,treating of the general connexions of ,mind and ,life and their relations to other modes of the ,unknowable4 ,,ii4 ,,the ,,inductions ,,of ,,psychology4--,a digest of such generalizations respecting mental phenomena as have already been empirically established4 ,,iii4 ,,general ,,synthesis4--,a republication1 with additional chapters1 of the same part in the already-published ,the ,principles of ,psychology4 ,,iv4 ,,special ,,synthesis4--,a republication1 with extensive revisions and additions1 of the same part1 c4 c4 ,v4 ,,physical ,,synthesis4--,an attempt to show the manner in which the succession of states of consciousness conforms to a certain fundamental law of nervous action that follows from the ,first ,principles laid down at the outset4 ,,vol4 ,,ii4 ,,vi4 ,,special ,,analysis4--,as at present published1 but further elaborated by some additional chapters4 ,,vii4 ,,general ,,analysis4--,as at present published1 with several explanations and additions4 ,,viii4 ,,corollaries4--,consisting in part of a number of derivative principles which form a necessary introduction to ,sociology4#c ,,the ,,principles ,,of ,,sociology4 ,,vol4 ,i4 ,,part ,i4 ,,the ,,data ,,of ,,sociology4--,a statement of the several sets of factors entering into social phenomena--human ideas and feelings considered in their necessary order of evolution2 surrounding natural conditions2 and those ever complicating conditions to which ,society itself gives origin4 ,,ii4 ,,the ,,inductions ,,of ,,sociology4--,general facts1 structural and functional1 as gathered from a survey of ,societies and their changes3 in other words1 the empirical generalizations that are arrived at by comparing different societies1 and successive phases of the same society4 ,,iii4 ,,political ,,organization4--,the evolution of governments1 general and local1 as determined by natural causes2 their several types and metamorphoses2 their increasing complexity and specialization2 and the progressive limitation of their functions4 ,,vol4 ,,ii4 ,,iv4 ,,ecclesiastical ,,organization4--,tracing the differentiation of religious government from secular2 its successive complications and the multiplication of sects2 the growth and continued modification of religious ideas1 as caused by advancing knowledge and changing moral character2 and the gradual reconciliation of these ideas with the truths of abstract science4 ,v4 ,,ceremonial ,,organization4--,the natural history of that third kind of government which1 having a common root with the others1 and slowly becoming separate from and supplementary to them1 serves to regulate the minor actions of life4 ,,vi4 ,,industrial ,,organization4--,the development of productive and distributive agencies1 considered1 like the foregoing1 in its necessary causes3 comprehending not only the progressive division of labour1 and the increasing complexity of each industrial agency1 but also the successive forms of industrial government as passing through like phases with political government4 ,,vol4 ,,iii4 ,,vii4 ,,lingual ,,progress4--,the evolution of ,languages regarded as a psychological process determined by social conditions4 ,,viii4 ,,intellectual ,,progress4--,treated from the same point of view3 including the growth of classifications2 the evolution of science out of common knowledge2 the advance from qualitative to quantitative prevision1 from the indefinite to the definite1 and from the concrete to the abstract4 ,,ix4 ,,sthetic ,,progress4--,the ,fine ,arts similarly dealt with3 tracing their gradual differentiation from primitive institutions and from each other2 their increasing varieties of development2 and their advance in reality of expression and superiority of aim4 ,x4 ,,moral ,,progress4--,exhibiting the genesis of the slow emotional modifications which human nature undergoes in its adaptation to the social state4 ,,xi4 ,,the ,,consensus4--,treating of the necessary interdependence of structures and of functions in each type of society1 and in the successive phases of social development4#d ,,the ,,principles ,,of ,,morality4 ,,vol4 ,i4 ,,part ,i4 ,,the ,,data ,,of ,,morality4--,generalizations furnished by ,biology1 ,psychology and ,sociology1 which underlie a true theory of right living3 in other words1 the elements of that equilibrium between constitution and conditions of existence1 which is at once the moral ideal and the limit towards which we are progressing4 ,,ii4 ,,the ,,inductions ,,of ,,morality4--,those empirically-established rules of human action which are registered as essential laws by all civilized nations3 that is to say--the generalizations of expediency4 ,,iii4 ,,personal ,,morals4--,the principles of private conduct--physical1 intellectual1 moral and religious--that follow from the conditions to complete individual life3 or1 what is the same thing--those modes of private action which must result from the eventual equilibration of internal desires and external needs4 ,,vol4 ,,ii4 ,,iv4 ,,justice4--,the mutual limitations of men's actions necessitated by their co-existence as units of a society--limitations1 the perfect observance of which constitutes that state of equilibrium forming the goal of political progress4 ,v4 ,,negative ,,beneficence4--,those secondary limitations1 similarly necessitated1 which1 though less important and not cognizable by law1 are yet requisite to prevent mutual destruction of happiness in various indirect ways3 in other words--those minor self-restraints dictated by what may be called passive sympathy4 ,,vi4 ,,positive ,,beneficence4--,comprehending all modes of conduct1 dictated by active sympathy1 which imply pleasure in giving pleasure--modes of conduct that social adaptation has induced and must render ever more general2 and which1 in becoming universal1 must fill to the full the possible measure of human happiness4#e ,in anticipation of the obvious criticism that the scheme here sketched out is too extensive1 it may be remarked that an exhaustive treatment of each topic is not intended2 but simply the establishment of principles1 with such illustrations as are needed to make their bearings fully understood4 ,it may also be pointed out that1 besides minor fragments1 one large division 7,the ,principles of ,psychology7 is already1 in great part1 executed4 ,and a further reply is1 that impossible though it may prove to execute the whole1 yet nothing can be said against an attempt to set forth the ,first ,principles and to carry their applications as far as circumstances permit4 ,the price per ,number to be half-a-crown2 that is to say1 the four ,numbers yearly issued to be severally delivered1 post free1 to all annual subscribers of ,ten ,shillings4 99 99 99 99 99 ,this ,programme ,i have thought well to reprint for two reasons3--the one being that readers may1 from time to time1 be able to ascertain what topics are next to be dealt with2 the other being that an outline of the scheme may remain1 in case it should never be completed4 ,the successive instalments of which this volume consists1 were issued to the subscribers at the following dates3--,part ,i4 7pp4 #a-hj7 in ,october1 #ahfj2 ,part ,,ii4 7pp4 #ha-agf7 in ,january1 #ahfa2 ,part ,,iii4 7pp4 #agg-bef7 in ,april1 #ahfa2 ,part ,,iv4 7pp4 #beg-ccd7 in ,october1 #ahfa2 ,part ,v4 7pp4 #cce-daf7 in ,march1 #ahfb2 and ,part ,,vi4 7pp4 #dag-ejd7 in ,june1 #ahfb4 ,london1 ,june #eth1 #ahfb ----- ,footnote #a3 ,one of these generalizations is that currently known as 8the ,conservation of ,force20 a second may be gathered from a published essay on 8,progress3 its ,law and ,cause20 a third is indicated in a paper on 8,transcendental ,physiology20 and there are several others4 ,footnote #b3 ,the ideas to be developed in the second volume of the ,principles of ,biology the writer has already briefly expressed in sundry ,review-,articles4 ,part ,,iv4 will work out a doctrine suggested in a paper on 8,the ,laws of ,organic ,form10 published in the ,medico-,chirurgical ,review for ,january1 #ahei4 ,the germ of ,part ,v4 is contained in the essay on 8,transcendental ,physiology30 ,see ,essays1 pp4 #bhj-ij4 ,and in ,part ,,vi4 will be unfolded certain views crudely expressed in a 8,theory of ,population10 published in the ,westminster ,review for ,april1 #aheb4 ,footnote #c3 ,respecting the several additions to be made to the ,principles of ,psychology1 it seems needful only to say that ,part ,v4 is the unwritten division named in the preface to that work--a division of which the germ is contained in a note on page #edd1 and of which the scope has since been more definitely stated in a paper in the ,medico-,chirurgical ,review for ,jan4 #ahei4 ,footnote #d3 ,of this treatise on ,sociology a few small fragments may be found in already-published essays4 ,some of the ideas to be developed in ,part ,,ii4 are indicated in an article on 8,the ,social ,organism10 contained in the last number of the ,westminster ,review2 those which ,part ,v4 will work out1 may be gathered from the first half of a paper written some years since on 8,manners and ,fashion20 of ,part ,,viii4 the germs are contained in an article on the 8,genesis of ,science20 two papers on 8,the ,origin and ,function of ,music0 and 8,the ,philosophy of ,style10 contain some ideas to be embodied in ,part ,,ix42 and from a criticism of ,mr4 ,bain's work on 8,the ,emotions and the ,will10 in the last number of the ,medico-,chirurgical ,review1 the central idea to be developed in ,part ,x4 may be inferred4 ,footnote #e3 ,part ,,iv4 of the ,principles of ,morality will be co-extensive 7though not identical7 with the first half of the writer's ,social ,statics4 ,,contents4 ,,part ,i4--,,the ,,unknowable4 ,,chap4 ,,page ,i4-- ,,religion ,,and ,,science #c ,,ii4-- ,,ultimate ,,religious ,,ideas #be ,,iii4-- ,,ultimate ,,scientific ,,ideas #dg ,,iv4-- ,,the ,,relativity ,,of ,,all ,,knowledge #fh ,v4-- ,,the ,,reconciliation #ih ,,part ,,ii4--,,laws ,,of ,,the ,,knowable4 ,i4-- ,,laws ,,in ,,general #abg ,,ii4-- ,,the ,,law ,,of ,,evolution #adf ,,iii4-- ,,the ,,law ,,of ,,evolution 7,,continued7 #age ,,iv4-- ,,the ,,causes ,,of ,,evolution #bai ,v4-- ,,space1 ,,time1 ,,matter1 ,,motion1 ,,and ,,force #bbd ,,vi4-- ,,the ,,indestructibility ,,of ,,matter #bch ,,vii4-- ,,the ,,continuity ,,of ,,motion #bdf ,,viii4-- ,,the ,,persistence ,,of ,,force #bea ,,ix4-- ,,the ,,correlation ,,and ,,equivalence ,,of ,,forces #bei ,x4-- ,,the ,,direction ,,of ,,motion #bhf ,,xi4-- ,,the ,,rhythm ,,of ,,motion #cac ,,xii4-- ,,the ,,conditions ,,essential ,,to ,,evolution #cce ,,xiii4-- ,,the ,,instability ,,of ,,the ,,homogeneous #ceh ,,xiv4-- ,,the ,,multiplication ,,of ,,effects #chh ,,xv4-- ,,differentiation ,,and ,,integration #daf ,,vi4-- ,,equilibration #ddj ,,xvii4-- ,,summary ,,and ,,conclusion #dhg ,,part ,i4 ,,the ,,unknowable4 ,,chapter ,i4 ,,religion ,,and ,,science4 #a4 ,we too often forget that not only is there 8a soul of goodness in things evil10 but very generally also1 a soul of truth in things erroneous4 ,while many admit the abstract probability that a falsity has usually a nucleus of reality1 few bear this abstract probability in mind1 when passing judgment on the opinions of others4 ,a belief that is finally proved to be grossly at variance with fact1 is cast aside with indignation or contempt2 and in the heat of antagonism scarcely any one inquires what there was in this belief which commended it to men's minds4 ,yet there must have been something4 ,and there is reason to suspect that this something was its correspondence with certain of their experiences3 an extremely limited or vague correspondence perhaps2 but still1 a correspondence4 ,even the absurdest report may in nearly every instance be traced to an actual occurrence2 and had there been no such actual occurrence1 this preposterous misrepresentation of it would never have existed4 ,though the distorted or magnified image transmitted to us through the refracting medium of rumour1 is utterly unlike the reality2 yet in the absence of the reality there would have been no distorted or magnified image4 ,and thus it is with human beliefs in general4 ,entirely wrong as they may appear1 the implication is that they germinated out of actual experiences--originally contained1 and perhaps still contain1 some small amount of verity4 ,more especially may we safely assume this1 in the case of beliefs that have long existed and are widely diffused2 and most of all so1 in the case of beliefs that are perennial and nearly or quite universal4 ,the presumption that any current opinion is not wholly false1 gains in strength according to the number of its adherents4 ,admitting1 as we must1 that life is impossible unless through a certain agreement between internal convictions and external circumstances2 admitting therefore that the probabilities are always in favour of the truth1 or at least the partial truth1 of a conviction2 we must admit that the convictions entertained by many minds in common are the most likely to have some foundation4 ,the elimination of individual errors of thought1 must give to the resulting judgment a certain additional value4 ,it may indeed be urged that many widely-spread beliefs are received on authority2 that those entertaining them make no attempts at verification2 and hence it may be inferred that the multitude of adherents adds but little to the probability of a belief4 ,but this is not true4 ,for a belief which gains extensive reception without critical examination1 is thereby proved to have a general congruity with the various other beliefs of those who receive it2 and in so far as these various other beliefs are based upon personal observation and judgment1 they give an indirect warrant to one with which they harmonize4 ,it may be that this warrant is of small value2 but still it is of some value4 ,could we reach definite views on this matter1 they would be extremely useful to us4 ,it is important that we should1 if possible1 form something like a general theory of current opinions2 so that we may neither over-estimate nor under-estimate their worth4 ,arriving at correct judgments on disputed questions1 much depends on the attitude of mind we preserve while listening to1 or taking part in1 the controversy2 and for the preservation of a right attitude1 it is needful that we should learn how true1 and yet how untrue1 are average human beliefs4 ,on the one hand1 we must keep free from that bias in favour of received ideas which expresses itself in such dogmas as 8,what every one says must be true10 or 8,the voice of the people is the voice of ,god40 ,on the other hand1 the fact disclosed by a survey of the past1 that majorities have usually been wrong1 must not blind us to the complementary fact1 that majorities have usually not been entirely wrong4 ,and the avoidance of these extremes being a prerequisite to catholic thinking1 we shall do well to provide ourselves with a safe-guard against them1 by making a valuation of opinions in the abstract4 ,to this end we must contemplate the kind of relation that ordinarily subsists between opinions and facts4 ,let us do so with one of those beliefs which under various forms has prevailed among all nations in all times4 99 99 99 99 99 #b4 ,the earliest traditions represent rulers as gods or demigods4 ,by their subjects1 primitive kings were regarded as superhuman in origin1 and superhuman in power4 ,they possessed divine titles2 received obeisances like those made before the altars of deities2 and were in some cases actually worshipped4 ,if there needs proof that the divine and half-divine characters originally ascribed to monarchs were ascribed literally1 we have it in the fact that there are still existing savage races1 among whom it is held that the chiefs and their kindred are of celestial origin1 or1 as elsewhere1 that only the chiefs have souls4 ,and of course along with beliefs of this kind1 there existed a belief in the unlimited power of the ruler over his subjects--an absolute possession of them1 extending even to the taking of their lives at will3 as even still in ,fiji1 where a victim stands unbound to be killed at the word of his chief2 himself declaring1 8whatever the king says must be done40 ,in times and among races somewhat less barbarous1 we find these beliefs a little modified4 ,the monarch1 instead of being literally thought god or demigod1 is conceived to be a man having divine authority1 with perhaps more or less of divine nature4 ,he retains however1 as in the ,east to the present day1 titles expressing his heavenly descent or relationships2 and is still saluted in forms and words as humble as those addressed to the ,deity4 ,while the lives and properties of his people1 if not practically so completely at his mercy1 are still in theory supposed to be his4 ,later in the progress of civilization1 as during the middle ages in ,europe1 the current opinions respecting the relationship of rulers and ruled are further changed4 ,for the theory of divine origin1 there is substituted that of divine right4 ,no longer god or demigod1 or even god-descended1 the king is now regarded as simply ,god's vice-gerent4 ,the obeisances made to him are not so extreme in their humility2 and his sacred titles lose much of their meaning4 ,moreover his authority ceases to be unlimited4 ,subjects deny his right to dispose at will of their lives and properties2 and yield allegiance only in the shape of obedience to his commands4 ,with advancing political opinion has come still greater restriction of imperial power4 ,belief in the supernatural character of the ruler1 long ago repudiated by ourselves for example1 has left behind it nothing more than the popular tendency to ascribe unusual goodness1 wisdom1 and beauty to the monarch4 ,loyalty1 which originally meant implicit submission to the king's will1 now means a merely nominal profession of subordination1 and the fulfilment of certain forms of respect4 ,our political practice1 and our political theory1 alike utterly reject those regal prerogatives which once passed unquestioned4 ,by deposing some1 and putting others in their places1 we have not only denied the divine rights of certain men to rule2 but we have denied that they have any rights beyond those originating in the assent of the nation4 ,though our forms of speech and our state-documents still assert the subjection of the citizens to the ruler1 our actual beliefs and our daily proceedings implicitly assert the contrary4 ,we obey no laws save those of our own making4 ,we have entirely divested the monarch of legislative power2 and should immediately rebel against his or her exercise of such power1 even in matters of the smallest concern4 ,in brief1 the aboriginal doctrine is all but extinct among us4 ,nor has the rejection of primitive political beliefs1 resulted only in transferring the authority of an autocrat to a representative body4 ,the views entertained respecting governments in general1 of whatever form1 are now widely different from those once entertained4 ,whether popular or despotic1 governments were in ancient times supposed to have unlimited authority over their subjects4 ,individuals existed for the benefit of the ,state2 not the ,state for the benefit of individuals4 ,in our days1 however1 not only has the national will been in many cases substituted for the will of the king2 but the exercise of this national will has been restricted to a much smaller sphere4 ,in ,england1 for instance1 though there has been established no definite theory setting bounds to governmental authority2 yet1 in practice1 sundry bounds have been set to it which are tacitly recognized by all4 ,there is no organic law formally declaring that the legislature may not freely dispose of the citizens' lives1 as early kings did when they sacrificed hecatombs of victims2 but were it possible for our legislature to attempt such a thing1 its own destruction would be the consequence1 rather than the destruction of citizens4 ,how entirely we have established the personal liberties of the subject against the invasions of ,state-power1 would be quickly demonstrated1 were it proposed by ,act of ,parliament forcibly to take possession of the nation1 or of any class1 and turn its services to public ends2 as the services of the people were turned by primitive rulers4 ,and should any statesman suggest a re-distribution of property such as was sometimes made in ancient democratic communities1 he would be met by a thousand-tongued denial of imperial power over individual possessions4 ,not only in our day have these fundamental claims of the citizen been thus made good against the ,state1 but sundry minor claims likewise4 ,ages ago1 laws regulating dress and mode of living fell into disuse2 and any attempt to revive them would prove the current opinion to be1 that such matters lie beyond the sphere of legal control4 ,for some centuries we have been asserting in practice1 and have now established in theory1 the right of every man to choose his own religious beliefs1 instead of receiving such beliefs on ,state-authority4 ,within the last few generations we have inaugurated complete liberty of speech1 in spite of all legislative attempts to suppress or limit it4 ,and still more recently we have claimed and finally obtained under a few exceptional restrictions1 freedom to trade with whomsoever we please4 ,thus our political beliefs are widely different from ancient ones1 not only as to the proper depositary of power to be exercised over a nation1 but also as to the extent of that power4 ,not even here has the change ended4 ,besides the average opinions which we have just described as current among ourselves1 there exists a less widely-diffused opinion going still further in the same direction4 ,there are to be found men who contend that the sphere of government should be narrowed even more than it is in ,england4 ,the modern doctrine that the ,state exists for the benefit of citizens1 which has now in a great measure supplanted the ancient doctrine that the citizens exist for the benefit of the ,state1 they would push to its logical results4 ,they hold that the freedom of the individual1 limited only by the like freedom of other individuals1 is sacred2 and that the legislature cannot equitably put further restrictions upon it1 either by forbidding any actions which the law of equal freedom permits1 or taking away any property save that required to pay the cost of enforcing this law itself4 ,they assert that the sole function of the ,state is the protection of persons against each other1 and against a foreign foe4 ,they urge that as1 throughout civilization1 the manifest tendency has been continually to extend the liberties of the subject1 and restrict the functions of the ,state1 there is reason to believe that the ultimate political condition must be one in which personal freedom is the greatest possible and governmental power the least possible3 that1 namely1 in which the freedom of each has no limit but the like freedom of all2 while the sole governmental duty is the maintenance of this limit4 ,here then in different times and places we find concerning the origin1 authority1 and functions of government1 a great variety of opinions--opinions of which the leading genera above indicated subdivide into countless species4 ,what now must be said about the truth or falsity of these opinions8 ,save among a few barbarous tribes the notion that a monarch is a god or demigod is regarded throughout the world as an absurdity almost passing the bounds of human credulity4 ,in but few places does there survive a vague notion that the ruler possesses any supernatural attributes4 ,most civilized communities1 which still admit the divine right of governments1 have long since repudiated the divine right of kings4 ,elsewhere the belief that there is anything sacred in legislative regulations is dying out3 laws are coming to be considered as conventional only4 ,while the extreme school holds that governments have neither intrinsic authority1 nor can have authority given to them by convention2 but can possess authority only as the administrators of those moral principles deducible from the conditions essential to social life4 ,of these various beliefs1 with their innumerable modifications1 must we then say that some one alone is wholly right and all the rest wholly wrong2 or must we say that each of them contains truth more or less completely disguised by errors8 ,the latter alternative is the one which analysis will force upon us4 ,ridiculous as they may severally appear to those not educated under them1 every one of these doctrines has for its vital element the recognition of an unquestionable fact4 ,directly or by implication1 each of them insists on a certain subordination of individual actions to social requirements4 ,there are wide differences as to the power to which this subordination is due2 there are wide differences as to the motive for this subordination2 there are wide differences as to its extent2 but that there must be some subordination all are agreed4 ,from the oldest and rudest idea of allegiance1 down to the most advanced political theory of our own day1 there is on this point complete unanimity4 ,though1 between the savage who conceives his life and property to be at the absolute disposal of his chief1 and the anarchist who denies the right of any government1 autocratic or democratic1 to trench upon his individual freedom1 there seems at first sight an entire and irreconcilable antagonism2 yet ultimate analysis discloses in them this fundamental community of opinion2 that there are limits which individual actions may not transgress--limits which the one regards as originating in the king's will1 and which the other regards as deducible from the equal claims of fellow-citizens4 ,it may perhaps at first sight seem that we here reach a very unimportant conclusion2 namely1 that a certain tacit assumption is equally implied in all these conflicting political creeds--an assumption which is indeed of self-evident validity4 ,the question1 however1 is not the value or novelty of the particular truth in this case arrived at4 ,my aim has been to exhibit the more general truth1 which we are apt to overlook1 that between the most opposite beliefs there is usually something in common1--something taken for granted by each2 and that this something1 if not to be set down as an unquestionable verity1 may yet be considered to have the highest degree of probability4 ,a postulate which1 like the one above instanced1 is not consciously asserted but unconsciously involved2 and which is unconsciously involved not by one man or body of men1 but by numerous bodies of men who diverge in countless ways and degrees in the rest of their beliefs2 has a warrant far transcending any that can be usually shown4 ,and when1 as in this case1 the postulate is abstract--is not based on some one concrete experience common to all mankind1 but implies an induction from a great variety of experiences1 we may say that it ranks next in certainty to the postulates of exact science4 ,do we not thus arrive at a generalization which may habitually guide us when seeking for the soul of truth in things erroneous8 ,while the foregoing illustration brings clearly home the fact1 that in opinions seeming to be absolutely and supremely wrong something right is yet to be found2 it also indicates the method we should pursue in seeking the something right4 ,this method is to compare all opinions of the same genus2 to set aside as more or less discrediting one another those various special and concrete elements in which such opinions disagree2 to observe what remains after the discordant constituents have been eliminated2 and to find for this remaining constituent that abstract expression which holds true throughout its divergent modifications4 99 99 99 99 99 #c4 ,a candid acceptance of this general principle and an adoption of the course it indicates1 will greatly aid us in dealing with those chronic antagonisms by which men are divided4 ,applying it not only to current ideas with which we are personally unconcerned1 but also to our own ideas and those of our opponents1 we shall be led to form far more correct judgments4 ,we shall be ever ready to suspect that the convictions we entertain are not wholly right1 and that the adverse convictions are not wholly wrong4 ,on the one hand we shall not1 in common with the great mass of the unthinking1 let our beliefs be determined by the mere accident of birth in a particular age on a particular part of the ,earth's surface2 and1 on the other hand1 we shall be saved from that error of entire and contemptuous negation1 which is fallen into by most who take up an attitude of independent criticism4 ,of all antagonisms of belief1 the oldest1 the widest1 the most profound and the most important1 is that between ,religion and ,science4 ,it commenced when the recognition of the simplest uniformities in surrounding things1 set a limit to the previously universal fetishism4 ,it shows itself everywhere throughout the domain of human knowledge3 affecting men's interpretations alike of the simplest mechanical accidents and of the most complicated events in the histories of nations4 ,it has its roots deep down in the diverse habits of thought of different orders of minds4 ,and the conflicting conceptions of nature and life which these diverse habits of thought severally generate1 influence for good or ill the tone of feeling and the daily conduct4 ,an unceasing battle of opinion like this which has been carried on throughout all ages under the banners of ,religion and ,science1 has of course generated an animosity fatal to a just estimate of either party by the other4 ,on a larger scale1 and more intensely than any other controversy1 has it illustrated that perennially significant fable concerning the knights who fought about the colour of a shield of which neither looked at more than one face4 ,each combatant seeing clearly his own aspect of the question1 has charged his opponent with stupidity or dishonesty in not seeing the same aspect of it2 while each has wanted the candour to go over to his opponent's side and find out how it was that he saw everything so differently4 ,happily the times display an increasing catholicity of feeling1 which we shall do well in carrying as far as our natures permit4 ,in proportion as we love truth more and victory less1 we shall become anxious to know what it is which leads our opponents to think as they do4 ,we shall begin to suspect that the pertinacity of belief exhibited by them must result from a perception of something we have not perceived4 ,and we shall aim to supplement the portion of truth we have found with the portion found by them4 ,making a more rational estimate of human authority1 we shall avoid alike the extremes of undue submission and undue rebellion--shall not regard some men's judgments as wholly good and others as wholly bad2 but shall rather lean to the more defensible position that none are completely right and none are completely wrong4 ,preserving1 as far as may be1 this impartial attitude1 let us then contemplate the two sides of this great controversy4 ,keeping guard against the bias of education and shutting out the whisperings of sectarian feeling1 let us consider what are the priori probabilities in favour of each party4 99 99 99 99 99 #d4 ,when duly realized1 the general principle above illustrated must lead us to anticipate that the diverse forms of religious belief which have existed and which still exist1 have all a basis in some ultimate fact4 ,judging by analogy the implication is1 not that any one of them is altogether right2 but that in each there is something right more or less disguised by other things wrong4 ,it may be that the soul of truth contained in erroneous creeds is very unlike most1 if not all1 of its several embodiments2 and indeed1 if1 as we have good reason to expect1 it is much more abstract than any of them1 its unlikeness necessarily follows4 ,but however different from its concrete expressions1 some essential verity must be looked for4 ,to suppose that these multiform conceptions should be one and all absolutely groundless1 discredits too profoundly that average human intelligence from which all our individual intelligences are inherited4 ,this most general reason we shall find enforced by other more special ones4 ,to the presumption that a number of diverse beliefs of the same class have some common foundation in fact1 must in this case be added a further presumption derived from the omnipresence of the beliefs4 ,religious ideas of one kind or other are almost if not quite universal4 ,even should it be true1 as alleged1 that there exist tribes of men who have nothing approaching to a theory of creation--even should it be true that only when a certain phase of intelligence is reached do the most rudimentary of such theories make their appearance2 the implication is practically the same4 ,grant that among all races who have passed a certain stage of intellectual development there are found vague notions concerning the origin and hidden nature of surrounding things2 and there arises the inference that such notions are necessary products of progressing intelligence4 ,their endless variety serves but to strengthen this conclusion3 showing as it does a more or less independent genesis--showing how1 in different places and times1 like conditions have led to similar trains of thought1 ending in analogous results4 ,that these countless different1 and yet allied1 phenomena presented by all religions are accidental or factitious1 is an untenable supposition4 ,a candid examination of the evidence quite negatives the doctrine maintained by some1 that creeds are priestly inventions4 ,even as a mere question of probabilities it cannot rationally be concluded that in every society1 past and present1 savage and civilized1 certain members of the community have combined to delude the rest1 in ways so analogous4 ,to any who may allege that some primitive fiction was devised by some primitive priesthood1 before yet mankind had diverged from a common centre1 a reply is furnished by philology2 for philology proves the dispersion of mankind to have commenced before there existed a language sufficiently organized to express religious ideas4 ,moreover1 were it otherwise tenable1 the hypothesis of artificial origin fails to account for the facts4 ,it does not explain why1 under all changes of form1 certain elements of religious belief remain constant4 ,it does not show us how it happens that while adverse criticism has from age to age gone on destroying particular theological dogmas1 it has not destroyed the fundamental conception underlying these dogmas4 ,it leaves us without any solution of the striking circumstance that when1 from the absurdities and corruptions accumulated around them1 national creeds have fallen into general discredit1 ending in indifferentism or positive denial1 there has always by and by arisen a re-assertion of them3 if not the same in form1 still the same in essence4 ,thus the universality of religious ideas1 their independent evolution among different primitive races1 and their great vitality1 unite in showing that their source must be deep-seated instead of superficial4 ,in other words1 we are obliged to admit that if not supernaturally derived as the majority contend1 they must be derived out of human experiences1 slowly accumulated and organized4 ,should it be asserted that religious ideas are products of the religious sentiment1 which1 to satisfy itself1 prompts imaginations that it afterwards projects into the external world1 and by and by mistakes for realities2 the problem is not solved1 but only removed further back4 ,whether the wish is father to the thought1 or whether sentiment and idea have a common genesis1 there equally arises the question--,whence comes the sentiment8 ,that it is a constituent in man's nature is implied by the hypothesis2 and cannot indeed be denied by those who prefer other hypotheses4 ,and if the religious sentiment1 displayed habitually by the majority of mankind1 and occasionally aroused even in those seemingly devoid of it1 must be classed among human emotions1 we cannot rationally ignore it4 ,we are bound to ask its origin and its function4 ,here is an attribute which1 to say the least1 has had an enormous influence--which has played a conspicuous part throughout the entire past as far back as history records1 and is at present the life of numerous institutions1 the stimulus to perpetual controversies1 and the prompter of countless daily actions4 ,any ,theory of ,things which takes no account of this attribute1 must1 then1 be extremely defective4 ,if with no other view1 still as a question in philosophy1 we are called on to say what this attribute means2 and we cannot decline the task without confessing our philosophy to be incompetent4 ,two suppositions only are open to us3 the one that the feeling which responds to religious ideas resulted1 along with all other human faculties1 from an act of special creation2 the other that it1 in common with the rest1 arose by a process of evolution4 ,if we adopt the first of these alternatives1 universally accepted by our ancestors and by the immense majority of our contemporaries1 the matter is at once settled3 man is directly endowed with the religious feeling by a creator2 and to that creator it designedly responds4 ,if we adopt the second alternative1 then we are met by the questions--,what are the circumstances to which the genesis of the religious feeling is due8 and--,what is its office8 ,we are bound to entertain these questions2 and we are bound to find answers to them4 ,considering all faculties1 as we must on this supposition1 to result from accumulated modifications caused by the intercourse of the organism with its environment1 we are obliged to admit that there exist in the environment certain phenomena or conditions which have determined the growth of the feeling in question2 and so are obliged to admit that it is as normal as any other faculty4 ,add to which that as1 on the hypothesis of a development of lower forms into higher1 the end towards which the progressive changes directly or indirectly tend1 must be adaptation to the requirements of existence2 we are also forced to infer that this feeling is in some way conducive to human welfare4 ,thus both alternatives contain the same ultimate implication4 ,we must conclude that the religious sentiment is either directly created1 or is created by the slow action of natural causes2 and whichever of these conclusions we adopt1 requires us to treat the religious sentiment with respect4 ,one other consideration should not be overlooked--a consideration which students of ,science more especially need to have pointed out4 ,occupied as such are with established truths1 and accustomed to regard things not already known as things to be hereafter discovered1 they are liable to forget that information1 however extensive it may become1 can never satisfy inquiry4 ,positive knowledge does not1 and never can1 fill the whole region of possible thought4 ,at the uttermost reach of discovery there arises1 and must ever arise1 the question--,what lies beyond8 ,as it is impossible to think of a limit to space so as to exclude the idea of space lying outside that limit2 so we cannot conceive of any explanation profound enough to exclude the question--,what is the explanation of that explanation8 ,regarding ,science as a gradually increasing sphere1 we may say that every addition to its surface does but bring it into wider contact with surrounding nescience4 ,there must ever remain therefore two antithetical modes of mental action4 ,throughout all future time1 as now1 the human mind may occupy itself1 not only with ascertained phenomena and their relations1 but also with that unascertained something which phenomena and their relations imply4 ,hence if knowledge cannot monopolize consciousness--if it must always continue possible for the mind to dwell upon that which transcends knowledge2 then there can never cease to be a place for something of the nature of ,religion2 since ,religion under all its forms is distinguished from everything else in this1 that its subject matter is that which passes the sphere of experience4 ,thus1 however untenable may be any or all the existing religious creeds1 however gross the absurdities associated with them1 however irrational the arguments set forth in their defence1 we must not ignore the verity which in all likelihood lies hidden within them4 ,the general probability that widely-spread beliefs are not absolutely baseless1 is in this case enforced by a further probability due to the omnipresence of the beliefs4 ,in the existence of a religious sentiment1 whatever be its origin1 we have a second evidence of great significance4 ,and as in that nescience which must ever remain the antithesis to science1 there is a sphere for the exercise of this sentiment1 we find a third general fact of like implication4 ,we may be sure therefore that religions1 though even none of them be actually true1 are yet all adumbrations of a truth4 99 99 99 99 99 #e4 ,as1 to the religious1 it will seem absurd to set forth any justification for ,religion2 so1 to the scientific1 will it seem absurd to defend ,science4 ,yet to do the last is certainly as needful as to do the first4 ,if there exists a class who1 in contempt of its follies and disgust at its corruptions1 have contracted towards ,religion a repugnance which makes them overlook the fundamental verity contained in it2 so1 too1 is there a class offended to such a degree by the destructive criticisms men of science make on the religious tenets they regard as essential1 that they have acquired a strong prejudice against ,science in general4 ,they are not prepared with any avowed reasons for their dislike4 ,they have simply a remembrance of the rude shakes which ,science has given to many of their cherished convictions1 and a suspicion that it may perhaps eventually uproot all they regard as sacred2 and hence it produces in them a certain inarticulate dread4 ,what is ,science8 ,to see the absurdity of the prejudice against it1 we need only remark that ,science is simply a higher development of common knowledge2 and that if ,science is repudiated1 all knowledge must be repudiated along with it4 ,the extremest bigot will not suspect any harm in the observation that the sun rises earlier and sets later in the summer than in the winter2 but will rather consider such an observation as a useful aid in fulfilling the duties of life4 ,well1 ,astronomy is an organized body of similar observations1 made with greater nicety1 extended to a larger number of objects1 and so analyzed as to disclose the real arrangements of the heavens1 and to dispel our false conceptions of them4 ,that iron will rust in water1 that wood will burn1 that long kept viands become putrid1 the most timid sectarian will teach without alarm1 as things useful to be known4 ,but these are chemical truths3 ,chemistry is a systematized collection of such facts1 ascertained with precision1 and so classified and generalized as to enable us to say with certainty1 concerning each simple or compound substance1 what change will occur in it under given conditions4 ,and thus is it with all the sciences4 ,they severally germinate out of the experiences of daily life2 insensibly as they grow they draw in remoter1 more numerous1 and more complex experiences2 and among these1 they ascertain laws of dependence like those which make up our knowledge of the most familiar objects4 ,nowhere is it possible to draw a line and say--here ,science begins4 ,and as it is the function of common observation to serve for the guidance of conduct2 so1 too1 is the guidance of conduct the office of the most recondite and abstract inquiries of ,science4 ,through the countless industrial processes and the various modes of locomotion which it has given to us1 ,physics regulates more completely our social life than does his acquaintance with the properties of surrounding bodies regulate the life of the savage4 ,anatomy and ,physiology1 through their effects on the practice of medicine and hygiene1 modify our actions almost as much as does our acquaintance with the evils and benefits which common environing agencies may produce on our bodies4 ,all ,science is prevision2 and all prevision ultimately aids us in greater or less degree to achieve the good and avoid the bad4 ,as certainly as the perception of an object lying in our path warns us against stumbling over it2 so certainly do those more complicated and subtle perceptions which constitute ,science1 warn us against stumbling over intervening obstacles in the pursuit of our distant ends4 ,thus being one in origin and function1 the simplest forms of cognition and the most complex must be dealt with alike4 ,we are bound in consistency to receive the widest knowledge which our faculties can reach1 or to reject along with it that narrow knowledge possessed by all4 ,there is no logical alternative between accepting our intelligence in its entirety1 or repudiating even that lowest intelligence which we possess in common with brutes4 ,to ask the question which more immediately concerns our argument--whether ,science is substantially true8--is much like asking whether the sun gives light4 ,and it is because they are conscious how undeniably valid are most of its propositions1 that the theological party regard ,science with so much secret alarm4 ,they know that during the two thousand years of its growth1 some of its larger divisions--mathematics1 physics1 astronomy--have been subject to the rigorous criticism of successive generations2 and have notwithstanding become ever more firmly established4 ,they know that1 unlike many of their own doctrines1 which were once universally received but have age by age been more frequently called in question1 the doctrines of ,science1 at first confined to a few scattered inquirers1 have been slowly growing into general acceptance1 and are now in great part admitted as beyond dispute4 ,they know that men of science throughout the world subject each other's results to the most searching examination2 and that error is mercilessly exposed and rejected as soon as discovered4 ,and1 finally1 they know that still more conclusive testimony is to be found in the daily verification of scientific predictions1 and in the never-ceasing triumphs of those arts which ,science guides4 ,to regard with alienation that which has such high credentials is a folly4 ,though in the tone which many of the scientific adopt towards them1 the defenders of ,religion may find some excuse for this alienation2 yet the excuse is a very insufficient one4 ,on the side of ,science1 as on their own side1 they must admit that short-comings in the advocates do not tell essentially against that which is advocated4 ,science must be judged by itself3 and so judged1 only the most perverted intellect can fail to see that it is worthy of all reverence4 ,be there or be there not any other revelation1 we have a veritable revelation in ,science--a continuous disclosure1 through the intelligence with which we are endowed1 of the established order of the ,universe4 ,this disclosure it is the duty of every one to verify as far as in him lies2 and having verified1 to receive with all humility4 99 99 99 99 99 #f4 ,on both sides of this great controversy1 then1 truth must exist4 ,an unbiassed consideration of its general aspects forces us to conclude that ,religion1 everywhere present as a weft running through the warp of human history1 expresses some eternal fact2 while it is almost a truism to say of ,science that it is an organised mass of facts1 ever growing1 and ever being more completely purified from errors4 ,and if both have bases in the reality of things1 then between them there must be a fundamental harmony4 ,it is an incredible hypothesis that there are two orders of truth1 in absolute and everlasting opposition4 ,only on some ,manichean theory1 which among ourselves no one dares openly avow however much his beliefs may be tainted by it1 is such a supposition even conceivable4 ,that ,religion is divine and ,science diabolical1 is a proposition which1 though implied in many a clerical declamation1 not the most vehement fanatic can bring himself distinctly to assert4 ,and whoever does not assert this1 must admit that under their seeming antagonism lies hidden an entire agreement4 ,each side1 therefore1 has to recognize the claims of the other as standing for truths that are not to be ignored4 ,he who contemplates the ,universe from the religious point of view1 must learn to see that this which we call ,science is one constituent of the great whole2 and as such ought to be regarded with a sentiment like that which the remainder excites4 ,while he who contemplates the universe from the scientific point of view1 must learn to see that this which we call ,religion is similarly a constituent of the great whole2 and being such1 must be treated as a subject of science with no more prejudice than any other reality4 ,it behoves each party to strive to understand the other1 with the conviction that the other has something worthy to be understood2 and with the conviction that when mutually recognized this something will be the basis of a complete reconciliation4 ,how to find this something--how to reconcile them1 thus becomes the problem which we should perseveringly try to solve4 ,not to reconcile them in any makeshift way--not to find one of those compromises we hear from time to time proposed1 which their proposers must secretly feel are artificial and temporary2 but to arrive at the terms of a real and permanent peace between them4 ,the thing we have to seek out1 is that ultimate truth which both will avow with absolute sincerity--with not the remotest mental reservation4 ,there shall be no concession--no yielding on either side of something that will by and by be reasserted2 but the common ground on which they meet shall be one which each will maintain for itself4 ,we have to discover some fundamental verity which ,religion will assert1 with all possible emphasis1 in the absence of ,science2 and which ,science1 with all possible emphasis1 will assert in the absence of ,religion--some fundamental verity in the defence of which each will find the other its ally4 ,or1 changing the point of view1 our aim must be to co-ordinate the seemingly opposed convictions which ,religion and ,science embody4 ,from the coalescence of antagonist ideas1 each containing its portion of truth1 there always arises a higher development4 ,as in ,geology when the igneous and aqueous hypotheses were united1 a rapid advance took place2 as in ,biology we are beginning to progress through the fusion of the doctrine of types with the doctrine of adaptations2 as in ,psychology the arrested growth recommences now that the disciples of ,kant and those of ,locke have both their views recognized in the theory that organized experiences produce forms of thought2 as in ,sociology1 now that it is beginning to assume a positive character1 we find a recognition of both the party of progress and the party of order1 as each holding a truth which forms a needful complement to that held by the other2 so must it be on a grander scale with ,religion and ,science4 ,here too we must look for a conception which combines the conclusions of both2 and here too we may expect important results from their combination4 ,to understand how ,science and ,religion express opposite sides of the same fact--the one its near or visible side1 and the other its remote or invisible side--this it is which we must attempt2 and to achieve this must profoundly modify our general ,theory of ,things4 ,already in the foregoing pages the method of seeking such a reconciliation has been vaguely foreshadowed4 ,before proceeding further1 however1 it will be well to treat the question of method more definitely4 ,to find that truth in which ,religion and ,science coalesce1 we must know in what direction to look for it1 and what kind of truth it is likely to be4 99 99 99 99 99 #g4 ,we have found priori reason for believing that in all religions1 even the rudest1 there lies hidden a fundamental verity4 ,we have inferred that this fundamental verity is that element common to all religions1 which remains after their discordant peculiarities have been mutually cancelled4 ,and we have further inferred that this element is almost certain to be more abstract than any current religious doctrine4 ,now it is manifest that only in some highly abstract proposition1 can ,religion and ,science find a common ground4 ,neither such dogmas as those of the trinitarian and unitarian1 nor any such idea as that of propitiation1 common though it may be to all religions1 can serve as the desired basis of agreement2 for ,science cannot recognize beliefs like these3 they lie beyond its sphere4 ,hence we see not only that1 judging by analogy1 the essential truth contained in ,religion is that most abstract element pervading all its forms2 but also that this most abstract element is the only one in which ,religion is likely to agree with ,science4 ,similarly if we begin at the other end1 and inquire what scientific truth can unite ,science and ,religion4 ,it is at once manifest that ,religion can take no cognizance of special scientific doctrines2 any more than ,science can take cognizance of special religious doctrines4 ,the truth which ,science asserts and ,religion indorses cannot be one furnished by mathematics2 nor can it be a physical truth2 nor can it be a truth in chemistry3 it cannot be a truth belonging to any particular science4 ,no generalization of the phenomena of space1 of time1 of matter1 or of force1 can become a ,religious conception4 ,such a conception1 if it anywhere exists in ,science1 must be more general than any of these--must be one underlying all of them4 ,if there be a fact which ,science recognizes in common with ,religion1 it must be that fact from which the several branches of ,science diverge1 as from their common root4 ,assuming then1 that since these two great realities are constituents of the same mind1 and respond to different aspects of the same ,universe1 there must be a fundamental harmony between them2 we see good reason to conclude that the most abstract truth contained in ,religion and the most abstract truth contained in ,science must be the one in which the two coalesce4 ,the largest fact to be found within our mental range must be the one of which we are in search4 ,uniting these positive and negative poles of human thought1 it must be the ultimate fact in our intelligence4 99 99 99 99 99 #h4 ,before proceeding in the search for this common datum let me bespeak a little patience4 ,the next three chapters1 setting out from different points and converging to the same conclusion1 will be comparatively unattractive4 ,students of philosophy will find in them much that is more or less familiar2 and to most of those who are unacquainted with the literature of modern metaphysics1 they may prove somewhat difficult to follow4 ,our argument however cannot dispense with these chapters2 and the greatness of the question at issue justifies even a heavier tax on the reader's attention4 ,the matter is one which concerns each and all of us more than any other matter whatever4 ,though it affects us little in a direct way1 the view we arrive at must indirectly affect us in all our relations--must determine our conception of the ,universe1 of ,life1 of ,human ,nature--must influence our ideas of right and wrong1 and so modify our conduct4 ,to reach that point of view from which the seeming discordance of ,religion and ,science disappears1 and the two merge into one1 must cause a revolution of thought fruitful in beneficial consequences1 and must surely be worth an effort4 ,here ending preliminaries1 let us now address ourselves to this all-important inquiry4 ,,chapter ,,ii4 ,,ultimate ,,religious ,,ideas4 #i4 ,when1 on the sea-shore1 we note how the hulls of distant vessels are hidden below the horizon1 and how1 of still remoter vessels1 only the uppermost sails are visible1 we realize with tolerable clearness the slight curvature of that portion of the sea's surface which lies before us4 ,but when we seek in imagination to follow out this curved surface as it actually exists1 slowly bending round until all its meridians meet in a point eight thousand miles below our feet1 we find ourselves utterly baffled4 ,we cannot conceive in its real form and magnitude even that small segment of our globe which extends a hundred miles on every side of us2 much less the globe as a whole4 ,the piece of rock on which we stand can be mentally represented with something like completeness3 we find ourselves able to think of its top1 its sides1 and its under surface at the same time2 or so nearly at the same time that they seem all present in consciousness together2 and so we can form what we call a conception of the rock4 ,but to do the like with the ,earth we find impossible4 ,if even to imagine the antipodes as at that distant place in space which it actually occupies1 is beyond our power2 much more beyond our power must it be at the same time to imagine all other remote points on the ,earth's surface as in their actual places4 ,yet we habitually speak as though we had an idea of the ,earth--as though we could think of it in the same way that we think of minor objects4 ,what conception1 then1 do we form of it8 the reader may ask4 ,that its name calls up in us some state of consciousness is unquestionable2 and if this state of consciousness is not a conception1 properly so called1 what is it8 ,the answer seems to be this3--,we have learnt by indirect methods that the ,earth is a sphere2 we have formed models approximately representing its shape and the distribution of its parts2 generally when the ,earth is referred to1 we either think of an indefinitely extended mass beneath our feet1 or else1 leaving out the actual ,earth1 we think of a body like a terrestrial globe2 but when we seek to imagine the ,earth as it really is1 we join these two ideas as well as we can--such perception as our eyes give us of the ,earth's surface we couple with the conception of a sphere4 ,and thus we form of the ,earth1 not a conception properly so called1 but only a symbolic conception4#f ,a large proportion of our conceptions1 including all those of much generality1 are of this order4 ,great magnitudes1 great durations1 great numbers1 are none of them actually conceived1 but are all of them conceived more or less symbolically2 and so1 too1 are all those classes of objects of which we predicate some common fact4 ,when mention is made of any individual man1 a tolerably complete idea of him is formed4 ,if the family he belongs to be spoken of1 probably but a part of it will be represented in thought3 under the necessity of attending to that which is said about the family1 we realize in imagination only its most important or familiar members1 and pass over the rest with a nascent consciousness which we know could1 if requisite1 be made complete4 ,should something be remarked of the class1 say farmers1 to which this family belongs1 we neither enumerate in thought all the individuals contained in the class1 nor believe that we could do so if required2 but we are content with taking some few samples of it1 and remembering that these could be indefinitely multiplied4 ,supposing the subject of which something is predicated be ,englishmen1 the answering state of consciousness is a still more inadequate representative of the reality4 ,yet more remote is the likeness of the thought to the thing1 if reference be made to ,europeans or to human beings4 ,and when we come to propositions concerning the mammalia1 or concerning the whole of the vertebrata1 or concerning animals in general1 or concerning all organic beings1 the unlikeness of our conceptions to the objects named reaches its extreme4 ,throughout which series of instances we see1 that as the number of objects grouped together in thought increases1 the concept1 formed of a few typical samples joined with the notion of multiplicity1 becomes more and more a mere symbol2 not only because it gradually ceases to represent the size of the group1 but also because as the group grows more heterogeneous1 the typical samples thought of are less like the average objects which the group contains4 ,this formation of symbolic conceptions1 which inevitably arises as we pass from small and concrete objects to large and to discrete ones1 is mostly a very useful1 and indeed necessary1 process4 ,when1 instead of things whose attributes can be tolerably well united in a single state of consciousness1 we have to deal with things whose attributes are too vast or numerous to be so united1 we must either drop in thought part of their attributes1 or else not think of them at all--either form a more or less symbolic conception1 or no conception4 ,we must predicate nothing of objects too great or too multitudinous to be mentally represented2 or we must make our predications by the help of extremely inadequate representations of such objects--mere symbols of them4 ,but while by this process alone we are enabled to form general propositions1 and so to reach general conclusions1 we are by this process perpetually led into danger1 and very often into error4 ,we habitually mistake our symbolic conceptions for real ones2 and so are betrayed into countless false inferences4 ,not only is it that in proportion as the concept we form of any thing or class of things1 misrepresents the reality1 we are apt to be wrong in any assertion we make respecting the reality2 but it is that we are led to suppose we have truly conceived a great variety of things which we have conceived only in this fictitious way2 and further to confound with these certain things which cannot be conceived in any way4 ,how almost unavoidably we fall into this error it will be needful here to observe4 ,from objects readily representable in their totality1 to those of which we cannot form even an approximate representation1 there is an insensible transition4 ,between a pebble and the entire ,earth a series of magnitudes might be introduced1 each of which differed from the adjacent ones so slightly that it would be impossible to say at what point in the series our conceptions of them became inadequate4 ,similarly1 there is a gradual progression from those groups of a few individuals which we can think of as groups with tolerable completeness1 to those larger and larger groups of which we can form nothing like true ideas4 ,whence it is manifest that we pass from actual conceptions to symbolic ones by infinitesimal steps4 ,note next that we are led to deal with our symbolic conceptions as though they were actual ones1 not only because we cannot clearly separate the two1 but also because1 in the great majority of cases1 the first serve our purposes nearly or quite as well as the last--are simply the abbreviated signs we substitute for those more elaborate signs which are our equivalents for real objects4 ,those very imperfect representations of ordinary things which we habitually make in thinking1 we know can be developed into adequate ones if needful4 ,those concepts of larger magnitudes and more extensive classes which we cannot make adequate1 we still find can be verified by some indirect process of measurement or enumeration4 ,and even in the case of such an utterly inconceivable object as the ,solar ,system1 we yet1 through the fulfilment of predictions founded on our symbolic conception of it1 gain the conviction that this symbolic conception stands for an actual existence1 and1 in a sense1 truly expresses certain of its constituent relations4 ,thus our symbolic conceptions being in the majority of cases capable of development into complete ones1 and in most other cases serving as steps to conclusions which are proved valid by their correspondence with observation1 we acquire a confirmed habit of dealing with them as true conceptions--as real representations of actualities4 ,learning by long experience that they can1 if needful1 be verified1 we are led habitually to accept them without verification4 ,and thus we open the door to some which profess to stand for known things1 but which really stand for things that cannot be known in any way4 ,to sum up1 we must say of conceptions in general1 that they are complete only when the attributes of the object conceived are of such number and kind that they can be represented in consciousness so nearly at the same time as to seem all present together2 that as the objects conceived become larger and more complex1 some of the attributes first thought of fade from consciousness before the rest have been represented1 and the conception thus becomes imperfect2 that when the size1 complexity1 or discreteness of the object conceived becomes very great1 only a small portion of its attributes can be thought of at once1 and the conception formed of it thus becomes so inadequate as to be a mere symbol2 that nevertheless such symbolic conceptions1 which are indispensable in general thinking1 are legitimate1 provided that by some cumulative or indirect process of thought1 or by the fulfilment of predictions based on them1 we can assure ourselves that they stand for actualities2 but that when our symbolic conceptions are such that no cumulative or indirect processes of thought can enable us to ascertain that there are corresponding actualities1 nor any predictions be made whose fulfilment can prove this1 then they are altogether vicious and illusive1 and in no way distinguishable from pure fictions4 99 99 99 99 99 #aj4 ,and now to consider the bearings of this general truth on our immediate topic--,ultimate ,religious ,ideas4 ,to the aboriginal man and to every civilized child the problem of the ,universe suggests itself4 ,what is it8 and whence comes it8 are questions that press for solution1 when1 from time to time1 the imagination rises above daily trivialities4 ,to fill the vacuum of thought1 any theory that is proposed seems better than none4 ,and in the absence of others1 any theory that is proposed easily gains a footing and afterwards maintains its ground3 partly from the readiness of mankind to accept proximate explanations2 partly from the authority which soon accumulates round such explanations when given4 ,a critical examination1 however1 will prove not only that no current hypothesis is tenable1 but also that no tenable hypothesis can be framed4 99 99 99 99 99 #aa4 ,respecting the origin of the ,universe three verbally intelligible suppositions may be made4 ,we may assert that it is self-existent2 or that it is self-created2 or that it is created by an external agency4 ,which of these suppositions is most credible it is not needful here to inquire4 ,the deeper question1 into which this finally merges1 is1 whether any one of them is even conceivable in the true sense of the word4 ,let us successively test them4 ,when we speak of a man as self-supporting1 of an apparatus as self-acting1 or of a tree as self-developed1 our expressions1 however inexact1 stand for things that can be realized in thought with tolerable completeness4 ,our conception of the self-development of a tree is doubtless symbolic4 ,but though we cannot really represent in consciousness the entire series of complex changes through which the tree passes1 yet we can thus represent the leading features of the series2 and general experience teaches us that by long continued observation we could gain the power to realize in thought a series of changes more fully representing the actual series3 that is1 we know that our symbolic conception of self-development can be expanded into something like a real conception2 and that it expresses1 however inaccurately1 an actual process in nature4 ,but when we speak of self-existence1 and1 helped by the above analogies1 form some vague symbolic conception of it1 we delude ourselves in supposing that this symbolic conception is of the same order as the others4 ,on joining the word self to the word existence1 the force of association makes us believe we have a thought like that suggested by the compound word self-acting4 ,an endeavour to expand this symbolic conception1 however1 will undeceive us4 ,in the first place1 it is clear that by self-existence we especially mean1 an existence independent of any other--not produced by any other3 the assertion of self-existence is simply an indirect denial of creation4 ,in thus excluding the idea of any antecedent cause1 we necessarily exclude the idea of a beginning2 for to admit the idea of a beginning--to admit that there was a time when the existence had not commenced--is to admit that its commencement was determined by something1 or was caused2 which is a contradiction4 ,self-existence1 therefore1 necessarily means existence without a beginning2 and to form a conception of self-existence is to form a conception of existence without a beginning4 ,now by no mental effort can we do this4 ,to conceive existence through infinite past-time1 implies the conception of infinite past-time1 which is an impossibility4 ,to this let us add1 that even were self-existence conceivable1 it would not in any sense be an explanation of the ,universe4 ,no one will say that the existence of an object at the present moment is made easier to understand by the discovery that it existed an hour ago1 or a day ago1 or a year ago2 and if its existence now is not made in the least degree more comprehensible by its existence during some previous finite period of time1 then no accumulation of such finite periods1 even could we extend them to an infinite period1 would make it more comprehensible4 ,thus the ,atheistic theory is not only absolutely unthinkable1 but1 even if it were thinkable1 would not be a solution4 ,the assertion that the ,universe is self-existent does not really carry us a step beyond the cognition of its present existence2 and so leaves us with a mere re-statement of the mystery4 ,the hypothesis of self-creation1 which practically amounts to what is called ,pantheism1 is similarly incapable of being represented in thought4 ,certain phenomena1 such as the precipitation of invisible vapour into cloud1 aid us in forming a symbolic conception of a self-evolved ,universe2 and there are not wanting indications in the heavens1 and on the earth1 which help us to render this conception tolerably definite4 ,but while the succession of phases through which the ,universe has passed in reaching its present form1 may perhaps be comprehended as in a sense self-determined2 yet the impossibility of expanding our symbolic conception of self-creation into a real conception1 remains as complete as ever4 ,really to conceive self-creation1 is to conceive potential existence passing into actual existence by some inherent necessity2 which we cannot do4 ,we cannot form any idea of a potential existence of the universe1 as distinguished from its actual existence4 ,if represented in thought at all1 potential existence must be represented as something1 that is as an actual existence2 to suppose that it can be represented as nothing1 involves two absurdities--that nothing is more than a negation1 and can be positively represented in thought2 and that one nothing is distinguished from all other nothings by its power to develope into something4 ,nor is this all4 ,we have no state of consciousness answering to the words--an inherent necessity by which potential existence became actual existence4 ,to render them into thought1 existence1 having for an indefinite period remained in one form1 must be conceived as passing without any external or additional impulse1 into another form2 and this involves the idea of a change without a cause--a thing of which no idea is possible4 ,thus the terms of this hypothesis do not stand for real thoughts2 but merely suggest the vaguest symbols incapable of any interpretation4 ,moreover1 even were it true that potential existence is conceivable as a different thing from actual existence2 and that the transition from the one to the other can be mentally realized as a self-determined change2 we should still be no forwarder3 the problem would simply be removed a step back4 ,for whence the potential existence8 ,this would just as much require accounting for as actual existence2 and just the same difficulties would meet us4 ,respecting the origin of such a latent power1 no other suppositions could be made than those above named--self-existence1 self-creation1 creation by external agency4 ,the self-existence of a potential universe is no more conceivable than we have found the self-existence of the actual universe to be4 ,the self-creation of such a potential universe would involve over again the difficulties here stated--would imply behind this potential universe a more remote potentiality2 and so on in an infinite series1 leaving us at last no forwarder than at first4 ,while to assign as the source of this potential universe an external agency1 would be to introduce the notion of a potential universe for no purpose whatever4 ,there remains to be examined the commonly-received or theistic hypothesis--creation by external agency4 ,alike in the rudest creeds and in the cosmogony long current among ourselves1 it is assumed that the genesis of the ,heavens and the ,earth is effected somewhat after the manner in which a workman shapes a piece of furniture4 ,and this assumption is made not by theologians only1 but by the immense majority of philosophers1 past and present4 ,equally in the writings of ,plato1 and in those of not a few living men of science1 we find it taken for granted that there is an analogy between the process of creation and the process of manufacture4 ,now in the first place1 not only is this conception one that cannot by any cumulative process of thought1 or the fulfilment of predictions based on it1 be shown to answer to anything actual2 and not only is it that in the absence of all evidence respecting the process of creation1 we have no proof of correspondence even between this limited conception and some limited portion of the fact2 but it is that the conception is not even consistent with itself--cannot be realized in thought1 when all its assumptions are granted4 ,though it is true that the proceedings of a human artificer may vaguely symbolize to us a method after which the ,universe might be shaped1 yet they do not help us to comprehend the real mystery2 namely1 the origin of the material of which the ,universe consists4 ,the artizan does not make the iron1 wood1 or stone1 he uses2 but merely fashions and combines them4 ,if we suppose suns1 and planets1 and satellites1 and all they contain to have been similarly formed by a 8,great ,artificer10 we suppose merely that certain pre-existing elements were thus put into their present arrangement4 ,but whence the pre-existing elements8 ,the comparison helps us not in the least to understand that2 and unless it helps us to understand that1 it is worthless4 ,the production of matter out of nothing is the real mystery1 which neither this simile nor any other enables us to conceive2 and a simile which does not enable us to conceive this1 may just as well be dispensed with4 ,still more manifest does the insufficiency of this theory of creation become1 when we turn from material objects to that which contains them--when instead of matter we contemplate space4 ,did there exist nothing but an immeasurable void1 explanation would be needed as much as now4 ,there would still arise the question--how came it so8 ,if the theory of creation by external agency were an adequate one1 it would supply an answer2 and its answer would be--space was made in the same manner that matter was made4 ,but the impossibility of conceiving this is so manifest1 that no one dares to assert it4 ,for if space was created1 it must have been previously non-existent4 ,the non-existence of space cannot1 however1 by any mental effort be imagined4 ,it is one of the most familiar truths that the idea of space as surrounding us on all sides1 is not for a moment to be got rid of--not only are we compelled to think of space as now everywhere present1 but we are unable to conceive its absence either in the past or the future4 ,and if the non-existence of space is absolutely inconceivable1 then1 necessarily1 its creation is absolutely inconceivable4 ,lastly1 even supposing that the genesis of the ,universe could really be represented in thought as the result of an external agency1 the mystery would be as great as ever2 for there would still arise the question--how came there to be an external agency8 ,to account for this only the same three hypotheses are possible--self-existence1 self-creation1 and creation by external agency4 ,of these the last is useless3 it commits us to an infinite series of such agencies1 and even then leaves us where we were4 ,by the second we are practically involved in the same predicament2 since1 as already shown1 self-creation implies an infinite series of potential existences4 ,we are obliged therefore to fall back upon the first1 which is the one commonly accepted and commonly supposed to be satisfactory4 ,those who cannot conceive a self-existent universe2 and who therefore assume a creator as the source of the universe2 take for granted that they can conceive a self-existent creator4 ,the mystery which they recognize in this great fact surrounding them on every side1 they transfer to an alleged source of this great fact2 and then suppose that they have solved the mystery4 ,but they delude themselves4 ,as was proved at the outset of the argument1 self-existence is rigorously inconceivable2 and this holds true whatever be the nature of the object of which it is predicated4 ,whoever agrees that the atheistic hypothesis is untenable because it involves the impossible idea of self-existence1 must perforce admit that the theistic hypothesis is untenable if it contains the same impossible idea4 ,thus these three different suppositions respecting the origin of things1 verbally intelligible though they are1 and severally seeming to their respective adherents quite rational1 turn out1 when critically examined1 to be literally unthinkable4 ,it is not a question of probability1 or credibility1 but of conceivability4 ,experiment proves that the elements of these hypotheses cannot even be put together in consciousness2 and we can entertain them only as we entertain such pseud-ideas as a square fluid and a moral substance--only by abstaining from the endeavour to render them into actual thoughts4 ,or1 reverting to our original mode of statement1 we may say that they severally involve symbolic conceptions of the illegitimate and illusive kind4 ,differing so widely as they seem to do1 the atheistic1 the pantheistic1 and the theistic hypotheses contain the same ultimate element4 ,it is impossible to avoid making the assumption of self-existence somewhere2 and whether that assumption be made nakedly1 or under complicated disguises1 it is equally vicious1 equally unthinkable4 ,be it a fragment of matter1 or some fancied potential form of matter1 or some more remote and still less imaginable cause1 our conception of its self-existence can be formed only by joining with it the notion of unlimited duration through past time4 ,and as unlimited duration is inconceivable1 all those formal ideas into which it enters are inconceivable2 and indeed1 if such an expression is allowable1 are the more inconceivable in proportion as the other elements of the ideas are indefinite4 ,so that in fact1 impossible as it is to think of the actual universe as self-existing1 we do but multiply impossibilities of thought by every attempt we make to explain its existence4 99 99 99 99 99 #ab4 ,if from the origin of the ,universe we turn to its nature1 the like insurmountable difficulties rise up before us on all sides--or rather1 the same difficulties under new aspects4 ,we find ourselves on the one hand obliged to make certain assumptions2 and yet on the other hand we find these assumptions cannot be represented in thought4 ,when we inquire what is the meaning of the various effects produced upon our senses--when we ask how there come to be in our consciousness impressions of sounds1 of colours1 of tastes1 and of those various attributes which we ascribe to bodies2 we are compelled to regard them as the effects of some cause4 ,we may stop short in the belief that this cause is what we call matter4 ,or we may conclude1 as some do1 that matter is only a certain mode of manifestation of spirit2 which is therefore the true cause4 ,or1 regarding matter and spirit as proximate agencies1 we may attribute all the changes wrought in our consciousness to immediate divine power4 ,but be the cause we assign what it may1 we are obliged to suppose some cause4 ,and we are not only obliged to suppose some cause1 but also a first cause4 ,the matter1 or spirit1 or whatever we assume to be the agent producing on us these various impressions1 must either be the first cause of them or not4 ,if it is the first cause1 the conclusion is reached4 ,if it is not the first cause1 then by implication there must be a cause behind it2 which thus becomes the real cause of the effect4 ,manifestly1 however complicated the assumptions1 the same conclusion must inevitably be reached4 ,we cannot think at all about the impressions which the external world produces on us1 without thinking of them as caused2 and we cannot carry out an inquiry concerning their causation1 without inevitably committing ourselves to the hypothesis of a ,first ,cause4 ,but now if we go a step further1 and ask what is the nature of this ,first ,cause1 we are driven by an inexorable logic to certain further conclusions4 ,is the ,first ,cause finite or infinite8 ,if we say finite we involve ourselves in a dilemma4 ,to think of the ,first ,cause as finite1 is to think of it as limited4 ,to think of it as limited1 necessarily implies a conception of something beyond its limits3 it is absolutely impossible to conceive a thing as bounded without conceiving a region surrounding its boundaries4 ,what now must we say of this region8 ,if the ,first ,cause is limited1 and there consequently lies something outside of it1 this something must have no ,first ,cause--must be uncaused4 ,but if we admit that there can be something uncaused1 there is no reason to assume a cause for anything4 ,if beyond that finite region over which the ,first ,cause extends1 there lies a region1 which we are compelled to regard as infinite1 over which it does not extend--if we admit that there is an infinite uncaused surrounding the finite caused2 we tacitly abandon the hypothesis of causation altogether4 ,thus it is impossible to consider the ,first ,cause as finite4 ,and if it cannot be finite it must be infinite4 ,another inference concerning the ,first ,cause is equally unavoidable4 ,it must be independent4 ,if it is dependent it cannot be the ,first ,cause2 for that must be the ,first ,cause on which it depends4 ,it is not enough to say that it is partially independent2 since this implies some necessity which determines its partial dependence1 and this necessity1 be it what it may1 must be a higher cause1 or the true ,first ,cause1 which is a contradiction4 ,but to think of the ,first ,cause as totally independent1 is to think of it as that which exists in the absence of all other existence2 seeing that if the presence of any other existence is necessary1 it must be partially dependent on that other existence1 and so cannot be the ,first ,cause4 ,not only however must the ,first ,cause be a form of being which has no necessary relation to any other form of being1 but it can have no necessary relation within itself4 ,there can be nothing in it which determines change1 and yet nothing which prevents change4 ,for if it contains something which imposes such necessities or restraints1 this something must be a cause higher than the ,first ,cause1 which is absurd4 ,thus the ,first ,cause must be in every sense perfect1 complete1 total3 including within itself all power1 and transcending all law4 ,or to use the established word1 it must be absolute4 ,here then respecting the nature of the ,universe1 we seem committed to certain unavoidable conclusions4 ,the objects and actions surrounding us1 not less than the phenomena of our own consciousness1 compel us to ask a cause2 in our search for a cause1 we discover no resting place until we arrive at the hypothesis of a ,first ,cause2 and we have no alternative but to regard this ,first ,cause as ,infinite and ,absolute4 ,these are inferences forced upon us by arguments from which there appears no escape4 ,it is hardly needful however to show those who have followed thus far1 how illusive are these reasonings and their results4 ,but that it would tax the reader's patience to no purpose1 it might easily be proved that the materials of which the argument is built1 equally with the conclusions based on them1 are merely symbolic conceptions of the illegitimate order4 ,instead1 however1 of repeating the disproof used above1 it will be desirable to pursue another method2 showing the fallacy of these conclusions by disclosing their mutual contradictions4 ,here ,i cannot do better than avail myself of the demonstration which ,mr ,mansel1 carrying out in detail the doctrine of ,sir ,william ,hamilton1 has given in his 8,limits of ,religious ,thought40 ,and ,i gladly do this1 not only because his mode of presentation cannot be improved1 but also because1 writing as he does in defence of the current ,theology1 his reasonings will be the more acceptable to the majority of readers4 99 99 99 99 99 #ac4 ,having given preliminary definitions of the ,first ,cause1 of the ,infinite1 and of the ,absolute1 ,mr ,mansel says3-- 8,but these three conceptions1 the ,cause1 the ,absolute1 the ,infinite1 all equally indispensable1 do they not imply contradiction to each other1 when viewed in conjunction1 as attributes of one and the same ,being8 ,a ,cause cannot1 as such1 be absolute3 the ,absolute cannot1 as such1 be a cause4 ,the cause1 as such1 exists only in relation to its effect3 the cause is a cause of the effect2 the effect is an effect of the cause4 ,on the other hand1 the conception of the ,absolute implies a possible existence out of all relation4 ,we attempt to escape from this apparent contradiction1 by introducing the idea of succession in time4 ,the ,absolute exists first by itself1 and afterwards becomes a ,cause4 ,but here we are checked by the third conception1 that of the ,infinite4 ,how can the ,infinite become that which it was not from the first8 ,if ,causation is a possible mode of existence1 that which exists without causing is not infinite2 that which becomes a cause has passed beyond its former limits40 99 99 99 8,supposing the ,absolute to become a cause1 it will follow that it operates by means of freewill and consciousness4 ,for a necessary cause cannot be conceived as absolute and infinite4 ,if necessitated by something beyond itself1 it is thereby limited by a superior power2 and if necessitated by itself1 it has in its own nature a necessary relation to its effect4 ,the act of causation must therefore be voluntary2 and volition is only possible in a conscious being4 ,but consciousness again is only conceivable as a relation4 ,there must be a conscious subject1 and an object of which he is conscious4 ,the subject is a subject to the object2 the object is an object to the subject2 and neither can exist by itself as the absolute4 ,this difficulty1 again1 may be for the moment evaded1 by distinguishing between the absolute as related to another and the absolute as related to itself4 ,the ,absolute1 it may be said1 may possibly be conscious1 provided it is only conscious of itself4 ,but this alternative is1 in ultimate analysis1 no less self-destructive than the other4 ,for the object of consciousness1 whether a mode of the subject's existence or not1 is either created in and by the act of consciousness1 or has an existence independent of it4 ,in the former case1 the object depends upon the subject1 and the subject alone is the true absolute4 ,in the latter case1 the subject depends upon the object1 and the object alone is the true absolute4 ,or if we attempt a third hypothesis1 and maintain that each exists independently of the other1 we have no absolute at all1 but only a pair of relatives2 for coexistence1 whether in consciousness or not1 is itself a relation40 8,the corollary from this reasoning is obvious4 ,not only is the ,absolute1 as conceived1 incapable of a necessary relation to anything else2 but it is also incapable of containing1 by the constitution of its own nature1 an essential relation within itself2 as a whole1 for instance1 composed of parts1 or as a substance consisting of attributes1 or as a conscious subject in antithesis to an object4 ,for if there is in the absolute any principle of unity1 distinct from the mere accumulation of parts or attributes1 this principle alone is the true absolute4 ,if1 on the other hand1 there is no such principle1 then there is no absolute at all1 but only a plurality of relatives4 ,the almost unanimous voice of philosophy1 in pronouncing that the absolute is both one and simple1 must be accepted as the voice of reason also1 so far as reason has any voice in the matter4 ,but this absolute unity1 as indifferent and containing no attributes1 can neither be distinguished from the multiplicity of finite beings by any characteristic feature1 nor be identified with them in their multiplicity4 ,thus we are landed in an inextricable dilemma4 ,the ,absolute cannot be conceived as conscious1 neither can it be conceived as unconscious3 it cannot be conceived as complex1 neither can it be conceived as simple3 it cannot be conceived by difference1 neither can it be conceived by the absence of difference3 it cannot be identified with the universe1 neither can it be distinguished from it4 ,the ,one and the ,many1 regarded as the beginning of existence1 are thus alike incomprehensible40 8,the fundamental conceptions of ,rational ,theology being thus self-destructive1 we may naturally expect to find the same antagonism manifested in their special applications4 99 99 99 ,how1 for example1 can ,infinite ,power be able to do all things1 and yet ,infinite ,goodness be unable to do evil8 ,how can ,infinite ,justice exact the utmost penalty for every sin1 and yet ,infinite ,mercy pardon the sinner8 ,how can ,infinite ,wisdom know all that is to come1 and yet ,infinite ,freedom be at liberty to do or to forbear8 ,how is the existence of ,evil compatible with that of an infinitely perfect ,being2 for if he wills it1 he is not infinitely good2 and if he wills it not1 his will is thwarted and his sphere of action limited80 99 99 99 8,let us1 however1 suppose for an instant that these difficulties are surmounted1 and the existence of the ,absolute securely established on the testimony of reason4 ,still we have not succeeded in reconciling this idea with that of a ,cause3 we have done nothing towards explaining how the absolute can give rise to the relative1 the infinite to the finite4 ,if the condition of casual activity is a higher state than that of quiescence1 the ,absolute1 whether acting voluntarily or involuntarily1 has passed from a condition of comparative imperfection to one of comparative perfection2 and therefore was not originally perfect4 ,if the state of activity is an inferior state to that of quiescence1 the ,absolute1 in becoming a cause1 has lost its original perfection4 ,there remains only the supposition that the two states are equal1 and the act of creation one of complete indifference4 ,but this supposition annihilates the unity of the absolute1 or it annihilates itself4 ,if the act of creation is real1 and yet indifferent1 we must admit the possibility of two conceptions of the absolute1 the one as productive1 the other as non-productive4 ,if the act is not real1 the supposition itself vanishes40 99 99 99 8,again1 how can the relative be conceived as coming into being8 ,if it is a distinct reality from the absolute1 it must be conceived as passing from non-existence into existence4 ,but to conceive an object as non-existent1 is again a self-contradiction2 for that which is conceived exists1 as an object of thought1 in and by that conception4 ,we may abstain from thinking of an object at all2 but1 if we think of it1 we cannot but think of it as existing4 ,it is possible at one time not to think of an object at all1 and at another to think of it as already in being2 but to think of it in the act of becoming1 in the progress from not being into being1 is to think that which1 in the very thought1 annihilates itself40 99 99 99 8,to sum up briefly this portion of my argument4 ,the conception of the ,absolute and ,infinite1 from whatever side we view it1 appears encompassed with contradictions4 ,there is a contradiction in supposing such an object to exist1 whether alone or in conjunction with others2 and there is a contradiction in supposing it not to exist4 ,there is a contradiction in conceiving it as one2 and there is a contradiction in conceiving it as many4 ,there is a contradiction in conceiving it as personal2 and there is a contradiction in conceiving it as impersonal4 ,it cannot1 without contradiction1 be represented as active2 nor1 without equal contradiction1 be represented as inactive4 ,it cannot be conceived as the sum of all existence2 nor yet can it be conceived as a part only of that sum40 99 99 99 99 99 #ad4 ,and now what is the bearing of these results on the question before us8 ,our examination of ,ultimate ,religious ,ideas has been carried on with the view of making manifest some fundamental verity contained in them4 ,thus far however we have arrived at negative conclusions only4 ,criticising the essential conceptions involved in the different orders of beliefs1 we find no one of them to be logically defensible4 ,passing over the consideration of credibility1 and confining ourselves to that of conceivability1 we see that ,atheism1 ,pantheism1 and ,theism1 when rigorously analysed1 severally prove to be absolutely unthinkable4 ,instead of disclosing a fundamental verity existing in each1 our investigation seems rather to have shown that there is no fundamental verity contained in any4 ,to carry away this conclusion1 however1 would be a fatal error2 as we shall shortly see4 ,leaving out the accompanying moral code1 which is in all cases a supplementary growth1 every ,religion may be defined as an priori theory of the ,universe4 ,the surrounding facts being given1 some form of agency is alleged which1 in the opinion of those alleging it1 accounts for these facts4 ,be it in the rudest ,fetishism1 which assumes a separate personality behind every phenomenon2 be it in ,polytheism1 in which these personalities are partially generalized2 be it in ,monotheism1 in which they are wholly generalized2 or be it in ,pantheism1 in which the generalized personality becomes one with the phenomena2 we equally find an hypothesis which is supposed to render the ,universe comprehensible4 ,nay1 even that which is commonly regarded as the negation of all ,religion--even positive ,atheism1 comes within the definition2 for it1 too1 in asserting the self-existence of ,space1 ,matter1 and ,motion1 which it regards as adequate causes of every appearance1 propounds an priori theory from which it holds the facts to be deducible4 ,now every theory tacitly asserts two things3 firstly1 that there is something to be explained2 secondly1 that such and such is the explanation4 ,hence1 however widely different speculators may disagree in the solutions they give of the same problem2 yet by implication they agree that there is a problem to be solved4 ,here then is an element which all creeds have in common4 ,religions diametrically opposed in their overt dogmas1 are yet perfectly at one in the tacit conviction that the existence of the world with all it contains and all which surrounds it1 is a mystery ever pressing for interpretation4 ,on this point1 if on no other1 there is entire unanimity4 ,thus we come within sight of that which we seek4 ,in the last chapter1 reasons were given for inferring that human beliefs in general1 and especially the perennial ones1 contain1 under whatever disguises of error1 some soul of truth2 and here we have arrived at a truth underlying even the grossest superstitions4 ,we saw further that this soul of truth was most likely to be some constituent common to conflicting opinions of the same order2 and here we have a constituent which may be claimed alike by all religions4 ,it was pointed out that this soul of truth would almost certainly be more abstract than any of the beliefs involving it2 and the truth we have arrived at is one exceeding in abstractness the most abstract religious doctrines4 ,in every respect1 therefore1 our conclusion answers to the requirements4 ,it has all the characteristics which we inferred must belong to that fundamental verity expressed by religions in general4 ,that this is the vital element in all religions is further proved by the fact1 that it is the element which not only survives every change1 but grows more distinct the more highly the religion is developed4 ,aboriginal creeds1 though pervaded by the idea of personal agencies which are usually unseen1 yet conceive these agencies under perfectly concrete and ordinary forms--class them with the visible agencies of men and animals2 and so hide a vague perception of mystery in disguises as unmysterious as possible4 ,the ,polytheistic conceptions in their advanced phases1 represent the presiding personalities in greatly idealized shapes1 existing in a remote region1 working in subtle ways1 and communicating with men by omens or through inspired persons2 that is1 the ultimate causes of things are regarded as less familiar and comprehensible4 ,the growth of a ,monotheistic faith1 accompanied as it is by a denial of those beliefs in which the divine nature is assimilated to the human in all its lower propensities1 shows us a further step in the same direction2 and however imperfectly this higher faith is at first realized1 we yet see in altars 8to the unknown and unknowable ,god10 and in the worship of a ,god that cannot by any searching be found out1 that there is a clearer recognition of the inscrutableness of creation4 ,further developments of theology1 ending in such assertions as that 8a ,god understood would be no ,god at all10 and 8to think that ,god is1 as we can think him to be1 is blasphemy10 exhibit this recognition still more distinctly2 and it pervades all the cultivated theology of the present day4 ,thus while other constituents of religious creeds one by one drop away1 this remains and grows even more manifest2 and so is shown to be the essential constituent4 ,nor does the evidence end here4 ,not only is the omnipresence of something which passes comprehension1 that most abstract belief which is common to all religions1 which becomes the more distinct in proportion as they develope1 and which remains after their discordant elements have been mutually cancelled2 but it is that belief which the most unsparing criticism of each leaves unquestionable--or rather makes ever clearer4 ,it has nothing to fear from the most inexorable logic2 but on the contrary is a belief which the most inexorable logic shows to be more profoundly true than any religion supposes4 ,for every religion1 setting out though it does with the tacit assertion of a mystery1 forthwith proceeds to give some solution of this mystery2 and so asserts that it is not a mystery passing human comprehension4 ,but an examination of the solutions they severally propound1 shows them to be uniformly invalid4 ,the analysis of every possible hypothesis proves1 not simply that no hypothesis is sufficient1 but that no hypothesis is even thinkable4 ,and thus the mystery which all religions recognize1 turns out to be a far more transcendent mystery than any of them suspect--not a relative1 but an absolute mystery4 ,here1 then1 is an ultimate religious truth of the highest possible certainty--a truth in which religions in general are at one with each other1 and with a philosophy antagonistic to their special dogmas4 ,and this truth1 respecting which there is a latent agreement among all mankind from the fetish-worshipper to the most stoical critic of human creeds1 must be the one we seek4 ,if ,religion and ,science are to be reconciled1 the basis of reconciliation must be this deepest1 widest1 and most certain of all facts--that the ,power which the ,universe manifests to us is utterly inscrutable4 ----- ,footnote #f3 ,those who may have before met with this term1 will perceive that it is here used in quite a different sense4 ,,chapter ,,iii4 ,,ultimate ,,scientific ,,ideas4 #ae4 ,what are ,space and ,time8 ,two hypotheses are current respecting them3 the one that they are objective1 and the other that they are subjective--the one that they are external to1 and independent of1 ourselves1 the other that they are internal1 and appertain to our own consciousness4 ,let us see what becomes of these hypotheses under analysis4 ,to say that ,space and ,time exist objectively1 is to say that they are entities4 ,the assertion that they are non-entities is self-destructive3 non-entities are non-existences2 and to allege that non-existences exist objectively1 is a contradiction in terms4 ,moreover1 to deny that ,space and ,time are things1 and so by implication to call them nothings1 involves the absurdity that there are two kinds of nothing4 ,neither can they be regarded as attributes of some entity2 seeing1 not only that it is impossible really to conceive any entity of which they are attributes1 but seeing further that we cannot think of them as disappearing1 even if everything else disappeared2 whereas attributes necessarily disappear along with the entities they belong to4 ,thus as ,space and ,time cannot be either non-entities1 nor the attributes of entities1 we have no choice but consider them as entities4 ,but while1 on the hypothesis of their objectivity1 ,space and ,time must be classed as things1 we find1 on experiment1 that to represent them in thought as things is impossible4 ,to be conceived at all1 a thing must be conceived as having attributes4 ,we can distinguish something from nothing1 only by the power which the something has to act on our consciousness2 the several affections it produces on our consciousness 7or else the hypothetical causes of them71 we attribute to it1 and call its attributes2 and the absence of these attributes is the absence of the terms in which the something is conceived1 and involves the absence of a conception4 ,what now are the attributes of ,space8 ,the only one which it is possible for a moment to think of as belonging to it1 is that of extension2 and to credit it with this implies a confusion of thought4 ,for extension and ,space are convertible terms3 by extension1 as we ascribe it to surrounding objects1 we mean occupancy of ,space2 and thus to say that ,space is extended1 is to say that ,space occupies ,space4 ,how we are similarly unable to assign any attribute to ,time1 scarcely needs pointing out4 ,nor are ,time and ,space unthinkable as entities only from the absence of attributes2 there is another peculiarity1 familiar to readers of metaphysics1 which equally excludes them from the category4 ,all entities which we actually know as such1 are limited2 and even if we suppose ourselves either to know or to be able to conceive some unlimited entity1 we of necessity in so classing it positively separate it from the class of limited entities4 ,but of ,space and ,time we cannot assert either limitation or the absence of limitation4 ,we find ourselves totally unable to form any mental image of unbounded ,space2 and yet totally unable to imagine bounds beyond which there is no ,space4 ,similarly at the other extreme3 it is impossible to think of a limit to the divisibility of ,space2 yet equally impossible to think of its infinite divisibility4 ,and1 without stating them1 it will be seen that we labour under like impotencies in respect to ,time4 ,thus we cannot conceive ,space and ,time as entities1 and are equally disabled from conceiving them as either the attributes of entities or as non-entities4 ,we are compelled to think of them as existing2 and yet cannot bring them within those conditions under which existences are represented in thought4 ,shall we then take refuge in the ,kantian doctrine8 shall we say that ,space and ,time are forms of the intellect1--8 priori laws or conditions of the conscious mind08 ,to do this is to escape from great difficulties by rushing into greater4 ,the proposition with which ,kant's philosophy sets out1 verbally intelligible though it is1 cannot by any effort be rendered into thought--cannot be interpreted into an idea properly so called1 but stands merely for a pseud-idea4 ,in the first place1 to assert that ,space and ,time1 as we are conscious of them1 are subjective conditions1 is by implication to assert that they are not objective realities3 if the ,space and ,time present to our minds belong to the ego1 then of necessity they do not belong to the non-ego4 ,now it is absolutely impossible to think this4 ,the very fact on which ,kant bases his hypothesis--namely that our consciousness of ,space and ,time cannot be suppressed--testifies as much2 for that consciousness of ,space and ,time which we cannot rid ourselves of1 is the consciousness of them as existing objectively4 ,it is useless to reply that such an inability must inevitably result if they are subjective forms4 ,the question here is--,what does consciousness directly testify8 ,and the direct testimony of consciousness is1 that ,time and ,space are not within but without the mind2 and so absolutely independent of it that they cannot be conceived to become non-existent even were the mind to become non-existent4 ,besides being positively unthinkable in what it tacitly denies1 the theory of ,kant is equally unthinkable in what it openly affirms4 ,it is not simply that we cannot combine the thought of ,space with the thought of our own personality1 and contemplate the one as a property of the other--though our inability to do this would prove the inconceivableness of the hypothesis--but it is that the hypothesis carries in itself the proof of its own inconceivableness4 ,for if ,space and ,time are forms of thought1 they can never be thought of2 since it is impossible for anything to be at once the form of thought and the matter of thought4 ,that ,space and ,time are objects of consciousness1 ,kant emphatically asserts by saying that it is impossible to suppress the consciousness of them4 ,how then1 if they are objects of consciousness1 can they at the same time be conditions of consciousness8 ,if ,space and ,time are the conditions under which we think1 then when we think of ,space and ,time themselves1 our thoughts must be unconditioned2 and if there can thus be unconditioned thoughts1 what becomes of the theory8 ,it results therefore that ,space and ,time are wholly incomprehensible4 ,the immediate knowledge which we seem to have of them1 proves1 when examined1 to be total ignorance4 ,while our belief in their objective reality is insurmountable1 we are unable to give any rational account of it4 ,and to posit the alternative belief 7possible to state but impossible to realize7 is merely to multiply irrationalities4 99 99 99 99 99 #af4 ,were it not for the necessities of the argument1 it would be inexcusable to occupy the reader's attention with the threadbare1 and yet unended1 controversy respecting the divisibility of matter4 ,matter is either infinitely divisible or it is not3 no third possibility can be named4 ,which of the alternatives shall we accept8 ,if we say that ,matter is infinitely divisible1 we commit ourselves to a supposition not realizable in thought4 ,we can bisect and re-bisect a body1 and continually repeating the act until we reduce its parts to a size no longer physically divisible1 may then mentally continue the process without limit4 ,to do this1 however1 is not really to conceive the infinite divisibility of matter1 but to form a symbolic conception incapable of expansion into a real one1 and not admitting of other verification4 ,really to conceive the infinite divisibility of matter1 is mentally to follow out the divisions to infinity2 and to do this would require infinite time4 ,on the other hand1 to assert that matter is not infinitely divisible1 is to assert that it is reducible to parts which no conceivable power can divide2 and this verbal supposition can no more be represented in thought than the other4 ,for each of such ultimate parts1 did they exist1 must have an under and an upper surface1 a right and a left side1 like any larger fragment4 ,now it is impossible to imagine its sides so near that no plane of section can be conceived between them2 and however great be the assumed force of cohesion1 it is impossible to shut out the idea of a greater force capable of overcoming it4 ,so that to human intelligence the one hypothesis is no more acceptable than the other2 and yet the conclusion that one or other must agree with the fact1 seems to human intelligence unavoidable4 ,again1 leaving this insoluble question1 let us ask whether substance has1 in reality1 anything like that extended solidity which it presents to our consciousness4 ,the portion of space occupied by a piece of metal1 seems to eyes and fingers perfectly filled3 we perceive a homogeneous1 resisting mass1 without any breach of continuity4 ,shall we then say that ,matter is as actually solid as it appears8 ,shall we say that whether it consists of an infinitely divisible element or of ultimate units incapable of further division1 its parts are everywhere in actual contact8 ,to assert as much entangles us in insuperable difficulties4 ,were ,matter thus absolutely solid1 it would be1 what it is not--absolutely incompressible2 since compressibility1 implying the nearer approach of constituent parts1 is not thinkable unless there is unoccupied space between the parts4 ,nor is this all4 ,it is an established mechanical truth1 that if a body1 moving at a given velocity1 strikes an equal body at rest in such wise that the two move on together1 their joint velocity will be but half that of the striking body4 ,now it is a law of which the negation is inconceivable1 that in passing from any one degree of magnitude to any other1 all intermediate degrees must be passed through4 ,or1 in the case before us1 a body moving at velocity #d1 cannot1 by collision1 be reduced to velocity #b1 without passing through all velocities between #d and #b4 ,but were ,matter truly solid--were its units absolutely incompressible and in absolute contact--this 8law of continuity10 as it is called1 would be broken in every case of collision4 ,for when1 of two such units1 one moving at velocity #d strikes another at rest1 the striking unit must have its velocity #d instantaneously reduced to velocity #b2 must pass from velocity #d to velocity #b without any lapse of time1 and without passing through intermediate velocities2 must be moving with velocities #d and #b at the same instant1 which is impossible4 ,the supposition that ,matter is absolutely solid being untenable1 there presents itself the ,newtonian supposition1 that it consists of solid atoms not in contact but acting on each other by attractive and repulsive forces1 varying with the distances4 ,to assume this1 however1 merely shifts the difficulty3 the problem is simply transferred from the aggregated masses of matter to these hypothetical atoms4 ,for granting that ,matter1 as we perceive it1 is made up of such dense extended units surrounded by atmospheres of force1 the question still arises--,what is the constitution of these units8 ,we have no alternative but to regard each of them as a small piece of matter4 ,looked at through a mental microscope1 each becomes a mass of substance such as we have just been contemplating4 ,exactly the same inquiries may be made respecting the parts of which each atom consists2 while exactly the same difficulties stand in the way of every answer4 ,and manifestly1 even were the hypothetical atom assumed to consist of still minuter ones1 the difficulty would re-appear at the next step2 nor could it be got rid of even by an infinite series of such assumptions4 ,boscovich's conception yet remains to us4 ,seeing that ,matter could not1 as ,leibnitz suggested1 be composed of unextended monads 7since the juxtaposition of an infinity of points having no extension1 could not produce that extension which matter possesses72 and perceiving objections to the view entertained by ,newton2 ,boscovich proposed an intermediate theory1 uniting1 as he considered1 the advantages of both and avoiding their difficulties4 ,his theory is1 that the constituents of ,matter are centres of force--points without dimensions1 which attract and repel each other in suchwise as to be kept at specific distances apart4 ,and he argues1 mathematically1 that the forces possessed by such centres might so vary with the distances1 that under given conditions the centres would remain in stable equilibrium with definite interspaces2 and yet1 under other conditions1 would maintain larger or smaller interspaces4 ,this speculation however1 ingeniously as it is elaborated1 and eluding though it does various difficulties1 posits a proposition which cannot by any effort be represented in thought3 it escapes all the inconceivabilities above indicated1 by merging them in the one inconceivability with which it sets out4 ,a centre of force absolutely without extension is unthinkable3 answering to these words we can form nothing more than a symbolic conception of the illegitimate order4 ,the idea of resistance cannot be separated in thought from the idea of an extended body which offers resistance4 ,to suppose that central forces can reside in points not infinitesimally small but occupying no space whatever--points having position only1 with nothing to mark their position--points in no respect distinguishable from the surrounding points that are not centres of force2--to suppose this1 is utterly beyond human power4 ,here it may possibly be said1 that though all hypotheses respecting the constitution of ,matter commit us to inconceivable conclusions when logically developed1 yet we have reason to think that one of them corresponds with the fact4 ,though the conception of ,matter as consisting of dense indivisible units1 is symbolic and incapable of being completely thought out1 it may yet be supposed to find indirect verification in the truths of chemistry4 ,these1 it is argued1 necessitate the belief that ,matter consists of particles of specific weights1 and therefore of specific sizes4 ,the general law of definite proportions seems impossible on any other condition than the existence of ultimate atoms2 and though the combining weights of the respective elements are termed by chemists their 8equivalents10 for the purpose of avoiding a questionable assumption1 we are unable to think of the combination of such definite weights1 without supposing it to take place between definite numbers of definite particles4 ,and thus it would appear that the ,newtonian view is at any rate preferable to that of ,boscovich4 ,a disciple of ,boscovich1 however1 may reply that his master's theory is involved in that of ,newton2 and cannot indeed be escaped4 8,what10 he may ask1 8is it that holds together the parts of these ultimate atoms804 8,a cohesive force10 his opponent must answer4 8,and what10 he may continue1 8is it that holds together the parts of any fragments into which1 by sufficient force1 an ultimate atom might be broken80 ,again the answer must be--a cohesive force4 8,and what10 he may still ask1 8if the ultimate atom were1 as we can imagine it to be1 reduced to parts as small in proportion to it1 as it is in proportion to a tangible mass of matter--what must give each part the ability to sustain itself1 and to occupy space80 ,still there is no answer but--a cohesive force4 ,carry the process in thought as far as we may1 until the extension of the parts is less than can be imagined1 we still cannot escape the admission of forces by which the extension is upheld2 and we can find no limit until we arrive at the conception of centres of force without any extension4 ,matter then1 in its ultimate nature1 is as absolutely incomprehensible as ,space and ,time4 ,frame what suppositions we may1 we find on tracing out their implications that they leave us nothing but a choice between opposite absurdities4 99 99 99 99 99 #ag4 ,a body impelled by the hand is clearly perceived to move1 and to move in a definite direction3 there seems at first sight no possibility of doubting that its motion is real1 or that it is towards a given point4 ,yet it is easy to show that we not only may be1 but usually are1 quite wrong in both these judgments4 ,here1 for instance1 is a ship which1 for simplicity's sake1 we will suppose to be anchored at the equator with her head to the ,west4 ,when the captain walks from stem to stern1 in what direction does he move8 ,east is the obvious answer--an answer which for the moment may pass without criticism4 ,but now the anchor is heaved1 and the vessel sails to the ,west with a velocity equal to that at which the captain walks4 ,in what direction does he now move when he goes from stem to stern8 ,you cannot say ,east1 for the vessel is carrying him as fast towards the ,west as he walks to the ,east2 and you cannot say ,west for the converse reason4 ,in respect to surrounding space he is stationary2 though to all on board the ship he seems to be moving4 ,but now are we quite sure of this conclusion8--,is he really stationary8 ,when we take into account the ,earth's motion round its axis1 we find that instead of being stationary he is travelling at the rate of #ajjj miles per hour to the ,east2 so that neither the perception of one who looks at him1 nor the inference of one who allows for the ship's motion1 is anything like the truth4 ,nor indeed1 on further consideration1 shall we find this revised conclusion to be much better4 ,for we have forgotten to allow for the ,earth's motion in its orbit4 ,this being some #fh1jjj miles per hour1 it follows that1 assuming the time to be midday1 he is moving1 not at the rate of #ajjj miles per hour to the ,east1 but at the rate of #fg1jjj miles per hour to the ,west4 ,nay1 not even now have we discovered the true rate and the true direction of his movement4 ,with the ,earth's progress in its orbit1 we have to join that of the whole ,solar system towards the constellation ,hercules2 and when we do this1 we perceive that he is moving neither ,east nor ,west1 but in a line inclined to the plane of the ,ecliptic1 and at a velocity greater or less 7according to the time of the year7 than that above named4 ,to which let us add1 that were the dynamic arrangements of our sidereal system fully known to us1 we should probably discover the direction and rate of his actual movement to differ considerably even from these4 ,how illusive are our ideas of ,motion1 is thus made sufficiently manifest4 ,that which seems moving proves to be stationary2 that which seems stationary proves to be moving2 while that which we conclude to be going rapidly in one direction1 turns out to be going much more rapidly in the opposite direction4 ,and so we are taught that what we are conscious of is not the real motion of any object1 either in its rate or direction2 but merely its motion as measured from an assigned position--either the position we ourselves occupy or some other4 ,yet in this very process of concluding that the motions we perceive are not the real motions1 we tacitly assume that there are real motions4 ,in revising our successive judgments concerning a body's course or velocity1 we take for granted that there is an actual course and an actual velocity--we take for granted that there are fixed points in space with respect to which all motions are absolute2 and we find it impossible to rid ourselves of this idea4 ,nevertheless1 absolute motion cannot even be imagined1 much less known4 ,motion as taking place apart from those limitations of space which we habitually associate with it1 is totally unthinkable4 ,for motion is change of place2 but in unlimited space1 change of place is inconceivable1 because place itself is inconceivable4 ,place can be conceived only by reference to other places2 and in the absence of objects dispersed through space1 a place could be conceived only in relation to the limits of space2 whence it follows that in unlimited space1 place cannot be conceived--all places must be equidistant from boundaries that do not exist4 ,thus while we are obliged to think that there is an absolute motion1 we find absolute motion incomprehensible4 ,another insuperable difficulty presents itself when we contemplate the transfer of ,motion4 ,habit blinds us to the marvelousness of this phenomenon4 ,familiar with the fact from childhood1 we see nothing remarkable in the ability of a moving thing to generate movement in a thing that is stationary4 ,it is1 however1 impossible to understand it4 ,in what respect does a body after impact differ from itself before impact8 ,what is this added to it which does not sensibly affect any of its properties and yet enables it to traverse space8 ,here is an object at rest and here is the same object moving4 ,in the one state it has no tendency to change its place2 but in the other it is obliged at each instant to assume a new position4 ,what is it which will for ever go on producing this effect without being exhausted8 and how does it dwell in the object8 ,the motion you say has been communicated4 ,but how8--,what has been communicated8 ,the striking body has not transferred a thing to the body struck2 and it is equally out of the question to say that it has transferred an attribute4 ,what then has it transferred8 ,once more there is the old puzzle concerning the connexion between ,motion and ,rest4 ,we daily witness the gradual retardation and final stoppage of things projected from the hand or otherwise impelled2 and we equally often witness the change from ,rest to ,motion produced by the application of force4 ,but truly to represent these transitions in thought1 we find impossible4 ,for a breach of the law of continuity seems necessarily involved2 and yet no breach of it is conceivable4 ,a body travelling at a given velocity cannot be brought to a state of rest1 or no velocity1 without passing through all intermediate velocities4 ,at first sight nothing seems easier than to imagine it doing this4 ,it is quite possible to think of its motion as diminishing insensibly until it becomes infinitesimal2 and many will think equally possible to pass in thought from infinitesimal motion to no motion4 ,but this is an error4 ,mentally follow out the decreasing velocity as long as you please1 and there still remains some velocity4 ,halve and again halve the rate of movement for ever1 yet movement still exists2 and the smallest movement is separated by an impassable gap from no movement4 ,as something1 however minute1 is infinitely great in comparison with nothing2 so is even the least conceivable motion1 infinite as compared with rest4 ,the converse perplexities attendant on the transition from ,rest to ,motion1 need not be specified4 ,these1 equally with the foregoing1 show us that though we are obliged to think of such changes as actually occurring1 their occurrence cannot be realized4 ,thus neither when considered in connexion with ,space1 nor when considered in connexion with ,matter1 nor when considered in connexion with ,rest1 do we find that ,motion is truly cognizable4 ,all efforts to understand its essential nature do but bring us to alternative impossibilities of thought4 99 99 99 99 99 #ah4 ,on lifting a chair1 the force exerted we regard as equal to that antagonistic force called the weight of the chair2 and we cannot think of these as equal without thinking of them as like in kind2 since equality is conceivable only between things that are connatural4 ,the axiom that action and reaction are equal and in opposite directions1 commonly exemplified by this very instance of muscular effort versus weight1 cannot be mentally realized on any other condition4 ,yet1 contrariwise1 it is incredible that the force as existing in the chair really resembles the force as present to our minds4 ,it scarcely needs to point out that the weight of the chair produces in us various feelings according as we support it by a single finger1 or the whole hand1 or the leg2 and hence to argue that as it cannot be like all these sensations there is no reason to believe it like any4 ,it suffices to remark that since the force as known to us is an affection of consciousness1 we cannot conceive the force existing in the chair under the same form without endowing the chair with consciousness4 ,so that it is absurd to think of ,force as in itself like our sensation of it1 and yet necessary so to think of it if we realize it in consciousness at all4 ,how1 again1 can we understand the connexion between ,force and ,matter8 ,matter is known to us only through its manifestations of ,force3 our ultimate test of ,matter is the ability to resist3 abstract its resistance and there remains nothing but empty extension4 ,yet1 on the other hand1 resistance is equally unthinkable apart from ,matter--apart from something extended4 ,not only1 as pointed out some pages back1 are centres of force devoid of extension unimaginable2 but1 as an inevitable corollary1 we cannot imagine either extended or unextended centres of force to attract and repel other such centres at a distance1 without the intermediation of some kind of matter4 ,we have here to remark1 what could not without anticipation be remarked when treating of ,matter1 that the hypothesis of ,newton1 equally with that of ,boscovich1 is open to the charge that it supposes one thing to act upon another through a space which is absolutely empty--a supposition which cannot be represented in thought4 ,this charge is indeed met by the introduction of a hypothetical fluid existing between the atoms or centres4 ,but the problem is not thus solved3 it is simply shifted1 and re-appears when the constitution of this fluid is inquired into4 ,how impossible it is to elude the difficulty presented by the transfer of ,force through space1 is best seen in the case of astronomical forces4 ,the ,sim acts upon us in such way as to produce the sensations of light and heat2 and we have ascertained that between the cause as existing in the ,sun1 and the effect as experienced on the ,earth1 a lapse of about eight minutes occurs3 whence unavoidably result in us1 the conceptions of both a force and a motion4 ,so that for the assumption of a luminiferous ether1 there is the defence1 not only that the exercise of force through #ie1jjj1jjj of miles of absolute vacuum is inconceivable1 but also that it is impossible to conceive motion in the absence of something moved4 ,similarly in the case of gravitation4 ,newton described himself as unable to think that the attraction of one body for another at a distance1 could be exerted in the absence of an intervening medium4 ,but now let us ask how much the forwarder we are if an intervening medium be assumed4 ,this ether whose undulations according to the received hypothesis constitute heat and light1 and which is the vehicle of gravitation--how is it constituted8 ,we must regard it1 in the way that physicists do regard it1 as composed of atoms which attract and repel each other--infinitesimal it may be in comparison with those of ordinary matter1 but still atoms4 ,and remembering that this ether is imponderable1 we are obliged to conclude that the ratio between the interspaces of these atoms and the atoms themselves1 is incommensurably greater than the like ratio in ponderable matter2 else the densities could not be incommensurable4 ,instead then of a direct action by the ,sun upon the ,earth without anything intervening1 we have to conceive the ,sun's action propagated through a medium whose molecules are probably as small relatively to their interspaces as are the ,sun and ,earth compared with the space between them3 we have to conceive these infinitesimal molecules acting on each other through absolutely vacant spaces which are immense in comparison with their own dimensions4 ,how is this conception easier than the other8 ,we still have mentally to represent a body as acting where it is not1 and in the absence of anything by which its action may be transferred2 and what matters it whether this takes place on a large or a small scale8 ,we see therefore that the exercise of ,force is altogether unintelligible4 ,we cannot imagine it except through the instrumentality of something having extension2 and yet when we have assumed this something1 we find the perplexity is not got rid of but only postponed4 ,we are obliged to conclude that matter1 whether ponderable or imponderable1 and whether aggregated or in its hypothetical units1 acts upon matter through absolutely vacant space2 and yet this conclusion is positively unthinkable4 ,again1 ,light1 ,heat1 ,gravitation and all central forces1 vary inversely as the squares of the distances2 and physicists in their investigations assume that the units of matter act upon each other according to the same law--an assumption which indeed they are obliged to make2 since this law is not simply an empirical one1 but one deducible mathematically from the relations of space--one of which the negation is inconceivable4 ,but now1 in any mass of matter which is in internal equilibrium1 what must follow8 ,the attractions and repulsions of the constituent atoms are balanced4 ,being balanced1 the atoms remain at their present distances2 and the mass of matter neither expands nor contracts4 ,but if the forces with which two adjacent atoms attract and repel each other both vary inversely as the squares of the distances1 as they must2 and if they are in equilibrium at their present distances1 as they are2 then1 necessarily1 they will be in equilibrium at all other distances4 ,let the atoms be twice as far apart1 and their attractions and repulsions will both be reduced to one fourth of their present amounts4 ,let them be brought within half the distance1 and their attractions and repulsions will both be quadrupled4 ,whence it follows that this matter will as readily as not assume any other density2 and can offer no resistance to any external agents4 ,thus we are obliged to say that these antagonist molecular forces do not both vary inversely as the squares of the distances1 which is unthinkable2 or else that matter does not possess that attribute of resistance by which alone we distinguish it from empty space1 which is absurd4 ,while then it is impossible to form any idea of ,force in itself1 it is equally impossible to comprehend either its mode of exercise or its law of variation4 99 99 99 99 99 #ai4 ,turning now from the outer to the inner world1 let us contemplate1 not the agencies to which we ascribe our subjective modifications1 but the subjective modifications themselves4 ,these constitute a series4 ,difficult as we find it distinctly to separate and individualize them1 it is nevertheless beyond question that our states of consciousness occur in succession4 ,is this chain of states of consciousness infinite or finite8 ,we cannot say infinite2 not only because we have indirectly reached the conclusion that there was a period when it commenced1 but also because all infinity is inconceivable--an infinite series included4 ,we cannot say finite2 for we have no knowledge of either of its ends4 ,go back in memory as far as we may1 we are wholly unable to identify our first states of consciousness3 the perspective of our thoughts vanishes in a dim obscurity where we can make out nothing4 ,similarly at the other extreme4 ,we have no immediate knowledge of a termination to the series at a future time2 and we cannot really lay hold of that temporary termination of the series reached at the present moment4 ,for the state of consciousness recognized by us as our last1 is not truly our last4 ,that any mental affection may be contemplated as one of the series1 it must be remembered--represented in thought1 not presented4 ,the truly last state of consciousness is that which is passing in the very act of contemplating a state just past--that in which we are thinking of the one before as the last4 ,so that the proximate end of the chain eludes us1 as well as the remote end4 8,but10 it may be said1 8though we cannot directly know consciousness to be finite in duration1 because neither of its limits can be actually reached2 yet we can very well conceive it to be so40 ,no3 not even this is true4 ,in the first place1 we cannot conceive the terminations of that consciousness which alone we really know--our own--any more than we can perceive its terminations4 ,for in truth the two acts are here one4 ,in either case such terminations must be1 as above said1 not presented in thought1 but represented2 and they must be represented as in the act of occurring4 ,now to represent the termination of consciousness as occurring in ourselves1 is to think of ourselves as contemplating the cessation of the last state of consciousness2 and this implies a supposed continuance of consciousness after its last state1 which is absurd4 ,in the second place1 if we regard the matter objectively--if we study the phenomena as occurring in others1 or in the abstract1 we are equally foiled4 ,consciousness implies perpetual change and the perpetual establishment of relations between its successive phases4 ,to be known at all1 any mental affection must be known as such or such--as like these foregoing ones or unlike those3 if it is not thought of in connexion with others--not distinguished or identified by comparison with others1 it is not recognized--is not a state of consciousness at all4 ,a last state of consciousness1 then1 like any other1 can exist only through a perception of its relations to previous states4 ,but such perception of its relations must constitute a state later than the last1 which is a contradiction4 ,or to put the difficulty in another form3--,if ceaseless change of state is the condition on which alone consciousness exists1 then when the supposed last state has been reached by the completion of the preceding change1 change has ceased2 therefore consciousness has ceased2 therefore the supposed last state is not a state of consciousness at all2 therefore there can be no last state of consciousness4 ,in short1 the perplexity is like that presented by the relations of ,motion and ,rest4 ,as we found it was impossible really to conceive ,rest becoming ,motion or ,motion becoming ,rest2 so here we find it is impossible really to conceive either the beginning or the ending of those changes which constitute consciousness4 ,hence1 while we are unable either to believe or to conceive that the duration of consciousness is infinite1 we are equally unable either to know it as finite1 or to conceive it as finite4 99 99 99 99 99 #bj4 ,nor do we meet with any greater success when1 instead of the extent of consciousness1 we consider its substance4 ,the question--,what is this that thinks8 admits of no better solution than the question to which we have just found none but inconceivable answers4 ,the existence of each individual as known to himself1 has been always held by mankind at large1 the most incontrovertible of truths4 ,to say--8,i am as sure of it as ,i am sure that ,i exist10 is1 in common speech1 the most emphatic expression of certainty4 ,and this fact of personal existence1 testified to by the universal consciousness of men1 has been made the basis of sundry philosophies2 whence may be drawn the inference1 that it is held by thinkers1 as well as by the vulgar1 to be beyond all facts unquestionable4 ,belief in the reality of self1 is1 indeed1 a belief which no hypothesis enables us to escape4 ,what shall we say of these successive impressions and ideas which constitute consciousness8 ,shall we say that they are the affections of something called mind1 which1 as being the subject of them1 is the real ego8 ,if we say this1 we manifestly imply that the ego is an entity4 ,shall we assert that these impressions and ideas are not the mere superficial changes wrought on some thinking substance1 but are themselves the very body of this substance--are severally the modified forms which it from moment to moment assumes8 ,this hypothesis1 equally with the foregoing1 implies that the individual exists as a permanent and distinct being2 since modifications necessarily involve something modified4 ,shall we then betake ourselves to the sceptic's position1 and argue that we know nothing more than our impressions and ideas themselves--that these are to us the only existences2 and that the personality said to underlie them is a mere fiction8 ,we do not even thus escape2 since this proposition1 verbally intelligible but really unthinkable1 itself makes the assumption which it professes to repudiate4 ,for how can consciousness be wholly resolved into impressions and ideas1 when an impression of necessity implies something impressed8 ,or again1 how can the sceptic who has decomposed his consciousness into impressions and ideas1 explain the fact that he considers them as his impressions and ideas8 ,or once more1 if1 as he must1 he admits that he has an impression of his personal existence1 what warrant can he show for rejecting this impression as unreal while he accepts all his other impressions as real8 ,unless he can give satisfactory answers to these queries1 which he cannot1 he must abandon his conclusions2 and must admit the reality of the individual mind4 ,but now1 unavoidable as is this belief--established though it is1 not only by the assent of mankind at large1 endorsed by divers philosophers1 but by the suicide of the sceptical argument--it is yet a belief admitting of no justification by reason3 nay1 indeed1 it is a belief which reason1 when pressed for a distinct answer1 rejects4 ,one of the most recent writers who has touched upon this question--,mr ,mansel--does indeed contend that in the consciousness of self1 we have a piece of real knowledge4 ,the validity of immediate intuition he holds in this case unquestionable3 remarking that 8let system-makers say what they will1 the unsophisticated sense of mankind refuses to acknowledge that mind is but a bundle of states of consciousness1 as matter is 7possibly7 a bundle of sensible qualities40 ,on which position the obvious comment is1 that it does not seem altogether a consistent one for a ,kantist1 who pays but small respect to 8the unsophisticated sense of mankind0 when it testifies to the objectivity of space4 ,passing over this1 however1 it may readily be shown that a cognition of self1 properly so called1 is absolutely negatived by the laws of thought4 ,the fundamental condition to all consciousness1 emphatically insisted upon by ,mr ,mansel in common with ,sir ,william ,hamilton and others1 is the antithesis of subject and object4 ,and on this 8primitive dualism of consciousness10 8from which the explanations of philosophy must take their start10 ,mr ,mansel founds his refutation of the ,german absolutists4 ,but now1 what is the corollary from this doctrine1 as bearing on the consciousness of self8 ,the mental act in which self is known1 implies1 like every other mental act1 a perceiving subject and a perceived object4 ,if1 then1 the object perceived is self1 what is the subject that perceives8 or if it is the true self which thinks1 what other self can it be that is thought of8 ,clearly1 a true cognition of self implies a state in which the knowing and the known are one--in which subject and object are identified2 and this ,mr ,mansel rightly holds to be the annihilation of both4 ,so that the personality of which each is conscious1 and of which the existence is to each a fact beyond all others the most certain1 is yet a thing which cannot truly be known at all3 knowledge of it is forbidden by the very nature of thought4 99 99 99 99 99 #ba4 ,ultimate ,scientific ,ideas1 then1 are all representative of realities that cannot be comprehended4 ,after no matter how great a progress in the colligation of facts and the establishment of generalizations ever wider and wider--after the merging of limited and derivative truths in truths that are larger and deeper has been carried no matter how far2 the fundamental truth remains as much beyond reach as ever4 ,the explanation of that which is explicable1 does but bring out into greater clearness the inexplicableness of that which remains behind4 ,alike in the external and the internal worlds1 the man of science sees himself in the midst of perpetual changes of which he can discover neither the beginning nor the end4 ,if1 tracing back the evolution of things1 he allows himself to entertain the hypothesis that the ,universe once existed in a diffused form1 he finds it utterly impossible to conceive how this came to be so2 and equally1 if he speculates on the future1 he can assign no limit to the grand succession of phenomena ever unfolding themselves before him4 ,in like manner if he looks inward1 he perceives that both ends of the thread of consciousness are beyond his grasp2 nay1 even beyond his power to think of as having existed or as existing in time to come4 ,when1 again1 he turns from the succession of phenomena1 external or internal1 to their intrinsic nature1 he is just as much at fault4 ,supposing him in every case able to resolve the appearances1 properties1 and movements of things1 into manifestations of ,force in ,space and ,time2 he still finds that ,force1 ,space1 and ,time pass all understanding4 ,similarly1 though the analysis of mental actions may finally bring him down to sensations1 as the original materials out of which all thought is woven1 yet he is little forwarder2 for he can give no account either of sensations themselves or of that something which is conscious of sensations4 ,objective and subjective things he thus ascertains to be alike inscrutable in their substance and genesis4 ,in all directions his investigations eventually bring him face to face with an insoluble enigma2 and he ever more clearly perceives it to be an insoluble enigma4 ,he learns at once the greatness and the littleness of the human intellect--its power in dealing with all that comes within the range of experience2 its impotence in dealing with all that transcends experience4 ,he realizes with a special vividness the utter incomprehensibleness of the simplest fact1 considered in itself4 ,he1 more than any other1 truly knows that in its ultimate essence nothing can be known4 ,,chapter ,,iv4 ,,the ,,relativity ,,of ,,all ,,knowledge4 #bb4 ,the same conclusion is thus arrived at1 from whichever point we set out4 ,if1 respecting the origin and nature of things1 we make some assumption1 we find that through an inexorable logic it inevitably commits us to alternative impossibilities of thought2 and this holds true of every assumption that can be imagined4 ,if1 contrariwise1 we make no assumption1 but set out from the sensible properties of surrounding objects1 and1 ascertaining their special laws of dependence1 go on to merge these in laws more and more general1 until we bring them all under some most general laws2 we still find ourselves as far as ever from knowing what it is which manifests these properties to us3 clearly as we seem to know it1 our apparent knowledge proves on examination to be utterly irreconcilable with itself4 ,ultimate religious ideas and ultimate scientific ideas1 alike turn out to be merely symbols of the actual1 not cognitions of it4 ,the conviction1 so reached1 that human intelligence is incapable of absolute knowledge1 is one that has been slowly gaining ground as civilization has advanced4 ,each new ontological theory1 from time to time propounded in lieu of previous ones shown to be untenable1 has been followed by a new criticism leading to a new scepticism4 ,all possible conceptions have been one by one tried and found wanting2 and so the entire field of speculation has been gradually exhausted without positive result3 the only result arrived at being the negative one above stated--that the reality existing behind all appearances is1 and must ever be1 unknown4 ,to this conclusion almost every thinker of note has subscribed4 8,with the exception10 says ,sir ,william ,hamilton1 8of a few late ,absolutist theorisers in ,germany1 this is1 perhaps1 the truth of all others most harmoniously re-echoed by every philosopher of every school40 ,and among these he names--,protagoras1 ,aristotle1 ,st4 ,augustin1 ,boethius1 ,averroes1 ,albertus ,magnus1 ,gerson1 ,leo ,hebrus1 ,melancthon1 ,scaliger1 ,francis ,piccolomini1 ,giordano ,bruno1 ,campanella1 ,bacon1 ,spinoza1 ,newton1 ,kant4 ,it yet remains to point out how this belief may be established rationally1 as well as empirically4 ,not only is it that1 as in the earlier thinkers above named1 a vague perception of the inscrutableness of things in themselves results from discovering the illusiveness of sense-impressions2 and not only is it that1 as shown in the foregoing chapters1 definite experiments evolve alternative impossibilities of thought out of every ultimate conception we can frame2 but it is that the relativity of our knowledge is demonstrable analytically4 ,the induction drawn from general and special experiences1 may be confirmed by a deduction from the nature of our intelligence4 ,two ways of reaching such a deduction exist4 ,proof that our cognitions are not1 and never can be1 absolute1 is obtainable by analyzing either the product of thought1 or the process of thought4 ,let us analyze each4 99 99 99 99 99 #bc4 ,if1 when walking through the fields some day in ,september1 you hear a rustle a few yards in advance1 and on observing the ditch-side where it occurs1 see the herbage agitated1 you will probably turn towards the spot to learn by what this sound and motion are produced4 ,as you approach there flutters into the ditch1 a partridge2 on seeing which your curiosity is satisfied--you have what you call an explanation of the appearances4 ,the explanation1 mark1 amounts to this2 that whereas throughout life you have had countless experiences of disturbance among small stationary bodies1 accompanying the movement of other bodies among them1 and have generalized the relation between such disturbances and such movements1 you consider this particular disturbance explained1 on finding it to present1 an instance of the like relation4 ,suppose you catch the partridge2 and1 wishing to ascertain why it did not escape1 examine it1 and find at one spot1 a slight trace of blood upon its feathers4 ,you now understand1 as you say1 what has disabled the partridge4 ,it has been wounded by a sportsman--adds another case to the many cases already seen by you1 of birds being killed or injured by the shot discharged at them from fowling-pieces4 ,and in assimilating this case to other such cases1 consists your understanding of it4 ,but now1 on consideration1 a difficulty suggests itself4 ,only a single shot has struck the partridge1 and that not in a vital place3 the wings are uninjured1 as are also those muscles which move them2 and the creature proves by its struggles that it has abundant strength4 ,why then1 you inquire of yourself1 does it not fly8 ,occasion favouring1 you put the question to an anatomist1 who furnishes you with a solution4 ,he points out that this solitary shot has passed close to the place at which the nerve supplying the wing-muscles of one side1 diverges from the spine2 and that a slight injury to this nerve1 extending even to the rupture of a few fibres1 may1 by preventing a perfect co-ordination in the actions of the two wings1 destroy the power of flight4 ,you are no longer puzzled4 ,but what has happened8--what has changed your state from one of perplexity to one of comprehension8 ,simply the disclosure of a class of previously known cases1 along with which you can include this case4 ,the connexion between lesions of the nervous system and paralysis of limbs has been already many times brought under your notice2 and you here find a relation of cause and effect that is essentially similar4 ,let us suppose you are led on to make further inquiries concerning organic actions1 which1 conspicuous and remarkable as they are1 you had not before cared to understand4 ,how is respiration effected8 you ask--why does air periodically rush into the lungs8 ,the answer is that in the higher vertebrata1 as in ourselves1 influx of air is caused by an enlargement of the thoracic cavity1 due1 partly to depression of the diaphragm1 partly to elevation of the ribs4 ,but how does elevation of the ribs enlarge the cavity8 ,in reply the anatomist shows you that the plane of each pair of ribs makes an acute angle with the spine2 that this angle widens when the moveable ends of the ribs are raised2 and he makes you realize the consequent dilatation of the cavity1 by pointing out how the area of a parallelogram increases as its angles approach to right angles--you understand this special fact when you see it to be an instance of a general geometrical fact4 ,there still arises1 however1 the question--why does the air rush into this enlarged cavity8 ,to which comes the answer that1 when the thoracic cavity is enlarged1 the contained air1 partially relieved from pressure1 expands1 and so loses some of its resisting power2 that hence it opposes to the pressure of the external air a less pressure2 and that as air1 like every other fluid1 presses equally in all directions1 motion must result along any line in which the resistance is less than elsewhere2 whence follows an inward current4 ,and this interpretation you recognize as one1 when a few facts of like kind1 exhibited more plainly in a visible fluid such as water1 are cited in illustration4 ,again1 when it was pointed out that the limbs are compound levers acting in essentially the same way as levers of iron or wood1 you might consider yourself as having obtained a partial rationale of animal movements4 ,the contraction of a muscle1 seeming before utterly unaccountable1 would seem less unaccountable were you shown how1 by a galvanic current1 a series of soft iron magnets could be made to shorten itself1 through the attraction of each magnet for its neighbours3--an alleged analogy which especially answers the purpose of our argument2 since1 whether real or fancied1 it equally illustrates the mental illumination that results on finding a class of cases within which a particular case may possibly be included4 ,and it may be further noted how1 in the instance here named1 an additional feeling of comprehension arises on remembering that the influence conveyed through the nerves to the muscles1 is1 though not positively electric1 yet a form of force nearly allied to the electric4 ,similarly when you learn that animal heat arises from chemical combination1 and so is evolved as heat is evolved in other chemical combinations--when you learn that the absorption of nutrient fluids through the coats of the intestines1 is an instance of osmotic action--when you learn that the changes undergone by food during digestion1 are like changes artificially producible in the laboratory2 you regard yourself as knowing something about the natures of these phenomena4 ,observe now what we have been doing4 ,turning to the general question1 let us note where these successive interpretations have carried us4 ,we began with quite special and concrete facts4 ,in explaining each1 and afterwards explaining the more general facts of which they are instances1 we have got down to certain highly general facts3--to a geometrical principle or property of space1 to a simple law of mechanical action1 to a law of fluid equilibrium--to truths in physics1 in chemistry1 in thermology1 in electricity4 ,the particular phenomena with which we set out1 have been merged in larger and larger groups of phenomena2 and as they have been so merged1 we have arrived at solutions that we consider profound in proportion as this process has been carried far4 ,still deeper explanations are simply further steps in the same direction4 ,when1 for instance1 it is asked why the law of action of the lever is what it is1 or why fluid equilibrium and fluid motion exhibit the relations which they do1 the answer furnished by mathematicians consists in the disclosure of the principle of virtual velocities--a principle holding true alike in fluids and solids--a principle under which the others are comprehended4 ,and similarly1 the insight obtained into the phenomena of chemical combination1 heat1 electricity1 c41 implies that a rationale of them1 when found1 will be the exposition of some highly general fact respecting the constitution of matter1 of which chemical1 electrical1 and thermal facts1 are merely different manifestations4 ,is this process limited or unlimited8 ,can we go on for ever explaining classes of facts by including them in larger classes2 or must we eventually come to a largest class8 ,the supposition that the process is unlimited1 were any one absurd enough to espouse it1 would still imply that an ultimate explanation could not be reached2 since infinite time would be required to reach it4 ,while the unavoidable conclusion that it is limited 7proved not only by the finite sphere of observation open to us1 but also by the diminution in the number of generalizations that necessarily accompanies increase of their breadth7 equally implies that the ultimate fact cannot be understood4 ,for if the successively deeper interpretations of nature which constitute advancing knowledge1 are merely successive inclusions of special truths in general truths1 and of general truths in truths still more general2 it obviously follows that the most general truth1 not admitting of inclusion in any other1 does not admit of interpretation4 ,manifestly1 as the most general cognition at which we arrive cannot be reduced to a more general one1 it cannot be understood4 ,of necessity1 therefore1 explanation must eventually bring us down to the inexplicable4 ,the deepest truth which we can get at1 must be unaccountable4 ,comprehension must become something other than comprehension1 before the ultimate fact can be comprehended4 99 99 99 99 99 #bd4 ,the inference which we thus find forced upon us when we analyze the product of thought1 as exhibited objectively in scientific generalizations1 is equally forced upon us by an analysis of the process of thought1 as exhibited subjectively in consciousness4 ,the demonstration of the necessarily relative character of our knowledge1 as deduced from the nature of intelligence1 has been brought to its most definite shape by ,sir ,william ,hamilton4 ,i cannot here do better than extract from his essay on the 8,philosophy of the ,unconditioned10 the passage containing the substance of his doctrine4 8,the mind can conceive10 he argues1 8and consequently can know10 only the limited1 and the conditionally limited4 ,the unconditionally unlimited1 or the ,infinite1 the unconditionally limited1 or the ,absolute1 cannot positively be construed to the mind2 they can be conceived1 only by a thinking away from1 or abstraction of1 those very conditions under which thought itself is realized2 consequently1 the notion of the ,unconditioned is only negative1--negative of the conceivable itself4 ,for example1 on the one hand we can positively conceive1 neither an absolute whole1 that is1 a whole so great1 that we cannot also conceive it as a relative part of a still greater whole2 nor an absolute part1 that is1 a part so small1 that we cannot also conceive it as a relative whole1 divisible into smaller parts4 ,on the other hand1 we cannot positively represent1 or realize1 or construe to the mind 7as here understanding and imagination coincide71 an infinite whole1 for this could only be done by the infinite synthesis in thought of finite wholes1 which would itself require an infinite time for its accomplishment2 nor1 for the same reason1 can we follow out in thought an infinite divisibility of parts4 ,the result is the same1 whether we apply the process to limitation in space1 in time1 or in degree4 ,the unconditional negation1 and the unconditional affirmation of limitation2 in other words1 the infinite and absolute1 properly so called1 are thus equally inconceivable to us4 ,as the conditionally limited 7which we may briefly call the conditioned7 is thus the only possible object of knowledge and of positive thought--thought necessarily supposes conditions4 ,to think is to condition2 and conditional limitation is the fundamental law of the possibility of thought4 ,for1 as the greyhound cannot outstrip his shadow1 nor 7by a more appropriate simile7 the eagle outsoar the atmosphere in which he floats1 and by which alone he may be supported2 so the mind cannot transcend that sphere of limitation1 within and through which exclusively the possibility of thought is realized4 ,thought is only of the conditioned2 because1 as we have said1 to think is simply to condition4 ,the absolute is conceived merely by a negation of conceivability2 and all that we know1 is only known as ----#8won from the void and formless infinite4' ,how1 indeed1 it could ever be doubted that thought is only of the conditioned1 may well be deemed a matter of the profoundest admiration4 ,thought cannot transcend consciousness2 consciousness is only possible under the antithesis of a subject and object of thought1 known only in correlation1 and mutually limiting each other2 while1 independently of this1 all that we know either of subject or object1 either of mind or matter1 is only a knowledge in each of the particular1 of the plural1 of the different1 of the modified1 of the phenomenal4 ,we admit that the consequence of this doctrine is1--that philosophy1 if viewed as more than a science of the conditioned1 is impossible4 ,departing from the particular1 we admit1 that we can never1 in our highest generalizations1 rise above the finite2 that our knowledge1 whether of mind or matter1 can be nothing more than a knowledge of the relative manifestations of an existence1 which in itself it is our highest wisdom to recognize as beyond the reach of philosophy1--in the language of ,st ,austin1--#8cognoscendo ignorari1 et ignorando cognosci4' 8,the conditioned is the mean between two extremes1--two inconditionates1 exclusive of each other1 neither of which can be conceived as possible1 but of which1 on the principles of contradiction and excluded middle1 one must be admitted as necessary4 ,on this opinion1 therefore1 reason is shown to be weak1 but not deceitful4 ,the mind is not represented as conceiving two propositions subversive of each other1 as equally possible2 but only1 as unable to understand as possible1 either of two extremes2 one of which1 however1 on the ground of their mutual repugnance1 it is compelled to recognize as true4 ,we are thus taught the salutary lesson1 that the capacity of thought is not to be constituted into the measure of existence2 and are warned from recognizing the domain of our knowledge as necessarily co-extensive with the horizon of our faith4 ,and by a wonderful revelation1 we are thus1 in the very consciousness of our inability to conceive aught above the relative and finite1 inspired with a belief in the existence of something unconditioned beyond the sphere of all comprehensible reality40 ,clear and conclusive as this statement of the case appears when carefully studied1 it is expressed in so abstract a manner as to be not very intelligible to the general reader4 ,a more popular presentation of it1 with illustrative applications1 as given by ,mr ,mansel in his 8,limits of ,religious ,thought10 will make it more fully understood4 ,the following extracts1 which ,i take the liberty of making from his pages1 will suffice4 8,the very conception of consciousness1 in whatever mode it may be manifested1 necessarily implies distinction between one object and another4 ,to be conscious1 we must be conscious of something2 and that something can only be known1 as that which it is1 by being distinguished from that which it is not4 ,but distinction is necessarily limitation2 for1 if one object is to be distinguished from another1 it must possess some form of existence which the other has not1 or it must not possess some form which the other has4 ,but it is obvious the ,infinite cannot be distinguished1 as such1 from the ,finite1 by the absence of any quality which the ,finite possesses2 for such absence would be a limitation4 ,nor yet can it be distinguished by the presence of an attribute which the ,finite has not2 for1 as no finite part can be a constituent of an infinite whole1 this differential characteristic must itself be infinite2 and must at the same time have nothing in common with the finite4 ,we are thus thrown back upon our former impossibility2 for this second infinite will be distinguished from the finite by the absence of qualities which the latter possesses4 ,a consciousness of the ,infinite as such thus necessarily involves a self-contradiction2 for it implies the recognition1 by limitation and difference1 of that which can only be given as unlimited and indifferent4 99 99 99 8,this contradiction1 which is utterly inexplicable on the supposition that the infinite is a positive object of human thought1 is at once accounted for1 when it is regarded as the mere negation of thought4 ,if all thought is limitation2--if whatever we conceive is1 by the very act of conception1 regarded as finite1--the infinite1 from a human point of view1 is merely a name for the absence of those conditions under which thought is possible4 ,to speak of a ,conception of the ,infinite is1 therefore1 at once to affirm those conditions and to deny them4 ,the contradiction1 which we discover in such a conception1 is only that which we have ourselves placed there1 by tacitly assuming the conceivability of the inconceivable4 ,the condition of consciousness is distinction2 and condition of distinction is limitation4 ,we can have no consciousness of ,being in general which is not some ,being in particular3 a thing1 in consciousness1 is one thing out of many4 ,in assuming the possibility of an infinite object of consciousness1 ,i assume1 therefore1 that it is at the same time limited and unlimited2--actually something1 without which it could not be an object of consciousness1 and actually nothing1 without which it could not be infinite4 99 99 99 8,a second characteristic of ,consciousness is1 that it is only possible in the form of a relation4 ,there must be a ,subject1 or person conscious1 and an ,object1 or thing of which he is conscious4 ,there can be no consciousness without the union of these two factors2 and1 in that union1 each exists only as it is related to the other4 ,the subject is a subject1 only in so far as it is conscious of an object3 the object is an object1 only in so far as it is apprehended by a subject3 and the destruction of either is the destruction of consciousness itself4 ,it is thus manifest that a consciousness of the ,absolute is equally self-contradictory with that of the ,infinite4 ,to be conscious of the ,absolute as such1 we must know that an object1 which is given in relation to our consciousness1 is identical with one which exists in its own nature1 out of all relation to consciousness4 ,but to know this identity1 we must be able to compare the two together2 and such a comparison is itself a contradiction4 ,we are in fact required to compare that of which we are conscious with that of which we are not conscious2 the comparison itself being an act of consciousness1 and only possible through the consciousness of both its objects4 ,it is thus manifest that1 even if we could be conscious of the absolute1 we could not possibly know that it is the absolute3 and1 as we can be conscious of an object as such1 only by knowing it to be what it is1 this is equivalent to an admission that we cannot be conscious of the absolute at all4 ,as an object of consciousness1 every thing is necessarily relative2 and what a thing may be out of consciousness1 no mode of consciousness can tell us4 8,this contradiction1 again1 admits of the same explanation as the former4 ,our whole notion of existence is necessarily relative2 for it is existence as conceived by us4 ,but ,existence1 as we conceive it1 is but a name for the several ways in which objects are presented to our consciousness1--a general term1 embracing a variety of relations4 ,the ,absolute1 on the other hand1 is a term expressing no object of thought1 but only a denial of the relation by which thought is constituted4 ,to assume absolute existence as an object of thought1 is thus to suppose a relation existing when the related terms exist no longer4 ,an object of thought exists1 as such1 in and through its relation to a thinker2 while the ,absolute1 as such1 is independent of all relation4 ,the ,conception of the ,absolute thus implies at the same time the presence and absence of the relation by which thought is constituted2 and our various endeavours to represent it are only so many modified forms of the contradiction involved in our original assumption4 ,here1 too1 the contradiction is one which we ourselves have made4 ,it does not imply that the ,absolute cannot exist2 but it implies1 most certainly1 that we cannot conceive it as existing40 ,here let me point out how the same general inference may be evolved from another fundamental condition of thought1 omitted by ,sir ,w4 ,hamilton1 and not supplied by ,mr ,mansel2--a condition which1 under its obverse aspect1 we have already contemplated in the last section4 ,every complete act of consciousness1 besides distinction and relation1 also implies likeness4 ,before it can become an idea1 or constitute a piece of knowledge1 a mental state must not only be known as separate in kind from certain foregoing states to which it is known as related by succession2 but it must further be known as of the same kind with certain other foregoing states4 ,that organization of changes which constitutes thinking1 involves continuous integration as well as continuous differentiation4 ,were each new affection of the mind perceived simply as an affection in some way contrasted with the preceding ones--were there but a chain of impressions1 each of which as it arose was merely distinguished from its predecessors2 consciousness would be an utter chaos4 ,to produce that orderly consciousness which we call intelligence1 there requires the assimilation of each impression to others1 that occurred earlier in the series4 ,both the successive mental states1 and the successive relations which they bear to each other1 must be classified2 and classification involves not only a parting of the unlike1 but also a binding together of the like4 ,in brief1 a true cognition is possible only through an accompanying recognition4 ,should it be objected that if so1 there cannot be a first cognition1 and hence there can be no cognition2 the reply is1 that cognition proper arises gradually--that during the first stage of incipient intelligence1 before the feelings produced by intercourse with the outer world have been put into order1 there are no cognitions1 strictly so called2 and that1 as every infant shows us1 these slowly emerge out of the confusion of unfolding consciousness as fast as the experiences are arranged into groups--as fast as the most frequently repeated sensations1 and their relations to each other1 become familiar enough to admit of their recognition as such or such1 whenever they recur4 ,should it be further objected that if cognition pre-supposes recognition1 there can be1 no cognition1 even by an adult1 of an object never before seen2 there is still the sufficient answer that in so far as it is not assimilated to previously-seen objects1 it is not known1 and that it is known in so far as it is assimilated to them4 ,of this paradox the interpretation is1 that an object is classifiable in various ways1 with various degrees of completeness4 ,an animal hitherto unknown 7mark the word71 though not referable to any established species or genus1 is yet recognized as belonging to one of the larger divisions--mammals1 birds1 reptiles1 or fishes2 or should it be so anomalous that its alliance with any of these is not determinable1 it may yet be classed as vertebrate or invertebrate2 or if it be one of those organisms of which it is doubtful whether the animal or vegetal characteristics predominate1 it is still known as a living body2 even should it be questioned whether it is organic1 it remains beyond question that it is a material object1 and it is cognized by being recognized as such4 ,whence it is manifest that a thing is perfectly known only when it is in all respects like certain things previously observed2 that in proportion to the number of respects in which it is unlike them1 is the extent to which it is unknown2 and that hence when it has absolutely no attribute in common with anything else1 it must be absolutely beyond the bounds of knowledge4 ,observe the corollary which here concerns us4 ,a cognition of the ,real1 as distinguished from the ,phenomenal1 must1 if it exists1 conform to this law of cognition in general4 ,the ,first ,cause1 the ,infinite1 the ,absolute1 to be known at all1 must be classed4 ,to be positively thought of1 it must be thought of as such or such--as of this or that kind4 ,can it be like in kind to anything of which we have sensible experience8 ,obviously not4 ,between the creating and the created1 there must be a distinction transcending any of the distinctions existing between different divisions of the created4 ,that which is uncaused cannot be assimilated to that which is caused3 the two being1 in the very naming1 antithetically opposed4 ,the ,infinite cannot be grouped along with something that is finite2 since1 in being so grouped1 it must be regarded as not-infinite4 ,it is impossible to put the ,absolute in the same category with anything relative1 so long as the ,absolute is defined as that of which no necessary relation can be predicated4 ,is it then that the ,actual1 though unthinkable by classification with the ,apparent1 is thinkable by classification with itself8 ,this supposition is equally absurd with the other4 ,it implies the plurality of the ,first ,cause1 the ,infinite1 the ,absolute2 and this implication is self-contradictory4 ,there cannot be more than one ,first ,cause2 seeing that the existence of more than one would involve the existence of something necessitating more than one1 which something would be the true ,first ,cause4 ,how self-destructive is the assumption of two or more ,infinites1 is manifest on remembering that such ,infinites1 by limiting each other1 would become finite4 ,and similarly1 an ,absolute which existed not alone but along with other ,absolutes1 would no longer be an absolute but a relative4 ,the ,unconditioned therefore1 as class-able neither with any form of the conditioned nor with any other ,unconditioned1 cannot be classed at all4 ,and to admit that it cannot be known as of such or such kind1 is to admit that it is unknowable4 ,thus1 from the very nature of thought1 the relativity of our knowledge is inferable in three several ways4 ,as we find by analyzing it1 and as we see it objectively displayed in every proposition1 a thought involves relation1 difference1 likeness4 ,whatever does not present each of these does not admit of cognition4 ,and hence we may say that the ,unconditioned1 as presenting none of them1 is trebly unthinkable4 99 99 99 99 99 #be4 ,from yet another point of view we may discern the same great truth4 ,if1 instead of examining our intellectual powers directly as exhibited in the act of thought1 or indirectly as exhibited in thought when expressed by words1 we look at the connexion between the mind and the world1 a like conclusion is forced upon us4 ,in the very definition of ,life1 when reduced to its most abstract shape1 this ultimate implication becomes visible4 ,all vital actions1 considered not separately but in their ensemble1 have for their final purpose the balancing of certain outer processes by certain inner processes4 ,there are unceasing external forces tending to bring the matter of which organic bodies consist1 into that state of stable equilibrium displayed by inorganic bodies2 there are internal forces by which this tendency is constantly antagonized2 and the perpetual changes which constitute ,life1 may be regarded as incidental to the maintenance of the antagonism4 ,to preserve the erect posture1 for instance1 we see that certain weights have to be neutralized by certain strains3 each limb or other organ1 gravitating to the ,earth and pulling down the parts to which it is attached1 has to be preserved in position by the tension of sundry muscles2 or in other words1 the group of forces which would if allowed bring the body to the ground1 has to be counterbalanced by another group of forces4 ,again1 to keep up the temperature at a particular point1 the external process of radiation and absorption of heat by the surrounding medium1 must be met by a corresponding internal process of chemical combination1 whereby more heat may be evolved2 to which add1 that if from atmospheric changes the loss becomes greater or less1 the production must become greater or less4 ,and similarly throughout the organic actions in general4 ,when we contemplate the lower kinds of life1 we see that the correspondences thus maintained are direct and simple2 as in a plant1 the vitality of which mainly consists in osmotic and chemical actions responding to the co-existence of light1 heat1 water1 and carbonic acid around it4 ,but in animals1 and especially in the higher orders of them1 the correspondences become extremely complex4 ,materials for growth and repair not being1 like those which plants require1 everywhere present1 but being widely dispersed and under special forms1 have to be found1 to be secured1 and to be reduced to a fit state for assimilation4 ,hence the need for locomotion2 hence the need for the senses2 hence the need for prehensile and destructive appliances2 hence the need for an elaborate digestive apparatus4 ,observe1 however1 that these successive complications are essentially nothing but aids to the maintenance of the organic balance in its integrity1 in opposition to those physical1 chemical1 and other agencies which tend to overturn it4 ,and observe1 moreover1 that while these successive complications subserve this fundamental adaptation of inner to outer actions1 they are themselves nothing else but further adaptations of inner to outer actions4 ,for what are those movements by which a predatory creature pursues its prey1 or by which its prey seeks to escape1 but certain changes in the organism fitted to meet certain changes in its environment8 ,what is that compound operation which constitutes the perception of a piece of food1 but a particular correlation of nervous modifications1 answering to a particular correlation of physical properties8 ,what is that process by which food when swallowed is reduced to a fit form for assimilation1 but a set of mechanical and chemical actions responding to the mechanical and chemical actions which distinguish the food8 ,whence it becomes manifest1 that while ,life in its simplest form is the correspondence of certain inner physico-chemical actions with certain outer physico-chemical actions1 each advance to a higher form of ,life consists in a better preservation of this primary correspondence by the establishment of other correspondences4 ,divesting this conception of all superfluities and reducing it to its most abstract shape1 we see that ,life is definable as the continuous adjustment of internal relations to external relations4 ,and when we so define it1 we discover that the physical and the psychial life are equally comprehended by the definition4 ,we perceive that this which we call ,intelligence1 shows itself when the external relations to which the internal ones are adjusted1 begin to be numerous1 complex1 and remote in time or space2 that every advance in ,intelligence essentially consists in the establishment of more varied1 more complete1 and more involved adjustments2 and that even the highest achievements of science are resolvable into mental relations of co-existence and sequence1 so co-ordinated as exactly to tally with certain relations of co-existence and sequence that occur externally4 ,a caterpillar1 wandering at random and at length finding its way on to a plant having a certain odour1 begins to eat--has inside of it an organic relation between a particular impression and a particular set of actions1 answering to the relation outside of it1 between scent and nutriment4 ,the sparrow1 guided by the more complex correlation of impressions which the colour1 form1 and movements of the caterpillar gave it2 and guided also by other correlations which measure the position and distance of the caterpillar2 adjusts certain correlated muscular movements in such way as to seize the caterpillar4 ,through a much greater distance in space is the hawk1 hovering above1 affected by the relations of shape and motion which the sparrow presents2 and the much more complicated and prolonged series of related nervous and muscular changes1 gone through in correspondence with the sparrow's changing relations of position1 finally succeed when they are precisely adjusted to these changing relations4 ,in the fowler1 experience has established a relation between the appearance and flight of a hawk and the destruction of other birds1 including game2 there is also in him an established relation between those visual impressions answering to a certain distance in space1 and the range of his gun2 and he has learned1 too1 by frequent observation1 what relations of position the sights must bear to a point somewhat in advance of the flying bird1 before he can fire with success4 ,similarly if we go back to the manufacture of the gun4 ,by relations of co-existence between colour1 density1 and place in the earth1 a particular mineral is known as one which yields iron2 and the obtainment of iron from it1 results when certain correlated acts of ours1 are adjusted to certain correlated affinities displayed by ironstone1 coal1 and lime1 at a high temperature4 ,if we descend yet a step further1 and ask a chemist to explain the explosion of gunpowder1 or apply to a mathematician for a theory of projectiles1 we still find that special or general relations of co-existence and sequence between properties1 motions1 spaces c41 are all they can teach us4 ,and lastly1 let it be noted that what we call truth1 guiding us to successful action and the consequent maintenance of life1 is simply the accurate correspondence of subjective to objective relations2 while error1 leading to failure and therefore towards death1 is the absence of such accurate correspondence4 ,if1 then1 ,life in all its manifestations1 inclusive of ,intelligence in its highest forms1 consists in the continuous adjustment of internal relations to external relations1 the necessarily relative character of our knowledge becomes obvious4 ,the simplest cognition being the establishment of some connexion between subjective states1 answering to some connexion between objective agencies2 and each successively more complex cognition being the establishment of some more involved connexion of such states1 answering to some more involved connexion of such agencies2 it is clear that the process1 no matter how far it be carried1 can never bring within the reach of ,intelligence1 either the states themselves or the agencies themselves4 ,ascertaining which things occur along with which1 and what things follow what1 supposing it to be pursued exhaustively1 must still leave us with co-existences and sequences only4 ,if every act of knowing is the formation of a relation in consciousness parallel to a relation in the environment1 then the relativity of knowledge is self-evident--becomes indeed a truism4 ,thinking being relationing1 no thought can ever express more than relations4 ,and here let us not omit to mark how that to which our intelligence is confined1 is that with which alone our intelligence is concerned4 ,the knowledge within our reach1 is the only knowledge that can be of service to us4 ,this maintenance of a correspondence between internal actions and external actions1 which both constitutes our life at each moment and is the means whereby life is continued through subsequent moments1 merely requires that the agencies acting upon us shall be known in their co-existences and sequences1 and not that they shall be known in themselves4 ,if x and y are two uniformly connected properties in some outer object1 while a and b are the effects they produce in our consciousness2 and if while the property x produces in us the indifferent mental state a1 the property y produces in us the painful mental state b 7answering to a physical injury72 then1 all that is requisite for our guidance1 is1 that x being the uniform accompaniment of y externally1 a shall be the uniform accompaniment of b internally2 so that when1 by the presence of x1 a is produced in consciousness1 b1 or rather the idea of b1 shall follow it1 and excite the motions by which the effect of y may be escaped4 ,the sole need is that a and b and the relation between them1 shall always answer to x and y and the relation between them4 ,it matters nothing to us if a and b are like x and y or not4 ,could they be exactly identical with them1 we should not be one whit the better off2 and their total dissimilarity is no disadvantage to us4 ,deep down then in the very nature of ,life1 the relativity of our knowledge is discernible4 ,the analysis of vital actions in general1 leads not only to the conclusion that things in themselves cannot be known to us2 but also to the conclusion that knowledge of them1 were it possible1 would be useless4 99 99 99 99 99 #bf4 ,there still remains the final question--,what must we say concerning that which transcends knowledge8 ,are we to rest wholly in the consciousness of phenomena8--is the result of inquiry to exclude utterly from our minds everything but the relative8 or must we also believe in something beyond the relative8 ,the answer of pure logic is held to be1 that by the limits of our intelligence we are rigorously confined within the relative2 and that anything transcending the relative can be thought of only as a pure negation1 or as a non-existence4 8,the absolute is conceived merely by a negation of conceivability10 writes ,sir ,william ,hamilton4 8,the ,absolute and the ,infinite0 says ,mr ,mansel1 8are thus1 like the ,inconceivable and the ,imperceptible1 names indicating1 not an object of thought or of consciousness at all1 but the mere absence of the conditions under which consciousness is possible40 ,from each of which extracts may be deduced the conclusion1 that since reason cannot warrant us in affirming the positive existence of what is cognizable only as a negation1 we cannot rationally affirm the positive existence of anything beyond phenomena4 ,unavoidable as this conclusion seems1 it involves1 ,i think1 a grave error4 ,if the premiss be granted1 the inference must doubtless be admitted2 but the premiss1 in the form presented by ,sir ,william ,hamilton and ,mr ,mansel1 is not strictly true4 ,though1 in the foregoing pages1 the arguments used by these writers to show that the ,absolute is unknowable1 have been approvingly quoted2 and though these arguments have been enforced by others equally thoroughgoing2 yet there remains to be stated a qualification1 which saves us from that scepticism otherwise necessitated4 ,it is not to be denied that so long as we confine ourselves to the purely logical aspect of the question1 the propositions quoted above must be accepted in their entirety2 but when we contemplate its more general1 or psychological1 aspect1 we find that these propositions are imperfect statements of the truth3 omitting1 or rather excluding1 as they do1 an all-important fact4 ,to speak specifically3--,besides that definite consciousness of which ,logic formulates the laws1 there is also an indefinite consciousness which cannot be formulated4 ,besides complete thoughts1 and besides the thoughts which though incomplete admit of completion1 there are thoughts which it is impossible to complete2 and yet which are still real1 in the sense that they are normal affections of the intellect4 ,observe in the first place1 that every one of the arguments by which the relativity of our knowledge is demonstrated1 distinctly postulates the positive existence of something beyond the relative4 ,to say that we cannot know the ,absolute1 is1 by implication1 to affirm that there is an ,absolute4 ,in the very denial of our power to learn what the ,absolute is1 there lies hidden the assumption that it is2 and the making of this assumption proves that the ,absolute has been present to the mind1 not as a nothing1 but as a something4 ,similarly with every step in the reasoning by which this doctrine is upheld4 ,the ,noumenon1 everywhere named as the antithesis of the ,phenomenon1 is throughout necessarily thought of as an actuality4 ,it is rigorously impossible to conceive that our knowledge is a knowledge of ,appearances only1 without at the same time conceiving a ,reality of which they are appearances2 for appearance without reality is unthinkable4 ,strike out from the argument the terms ,unconditioned1 ,infinite1 ,absolute1 with their equivalents1 and in place of them write1 8negation of conceivability10 or 8absence of the conditions under which consciousness is possible10 and you find that the argument becomes nonsense4 ,truly to realize in thought any one of the propositions of which the argument consists1 the ,unconditioned must be represented as positive and not negative4 ,how then can it be a legitimate conclusion from the argument1 that our consciousness of it is negative8 ,an argument1 the very construction of which assigns to a certain term a certain meaning1 but which ends in showing that this term has no such meaning1 is simply an elaborate suicide4 ,clearly1 then1 the very demonstration that a definite consciousness of the ,absolute is impossible to us1 unavoidably presupposes an indefinite consciousness of it4 ,perhaps the best way of showing that by the necessary conditions of thought1 we are obliged to form a positive though vague consciousness of this which transcends distinct consciousness1 is to analyze our conception of the antithesis between ,relative and ,absolute4 ,it is a doctrine called in question by none1 that such antinomies of thought as ,whole and ,part1 ,equal and ,unequal1 ,singular and ,plural1 are necessarily conceived as correlatives3 the conception of a part is impossible without the conception of a whole2 there can be no idea of equality without one of inequality4 ,and it is admitted that in the same manner1 the ,relative is itself conceivable as such1 only by opposition to the ,irrelative or ,absolute4 ,sir ,william ,hamilton however1 in his trenchant 7and in most parts unanswerable7 criticism on ,cousin1 contends1 in conformity with his position above stated1 that one of these correlatives is nothing whatever beyond the negation of the other4 8,correlatives0 he says 8certainly suggest each other1 but correlatives may1 or may not1 be equally real and positive4 ,in thought contradictories necessarily imply each other1 for the knowledge of contradictories is one4 ,but the reality of one contradictory1 so far from guaranteeing the reality of the other1 is nothing else than its negation4 ,thus every positive notion 7the concept of a thing by what it is7 suggests a negative notion 7the concept of a thing by what it is not72 and the highest positive notion1 the notion of the conceivable1 is not without its corresponding negative in the notion of the inconceivable4 ,but though these mutually suggest each other1 the positive alone is real2 the negative is only an abstraction of the other1 and in the highest generality1 even an abstraction of thought itself40 ,now the assertion that of such contradictories 8the negative is only an abstraction of the other0--8is nothing else than its negation10--is not true4 ,in such correlatives as ,equal and ,unequal1 it is obvious enough that the negative concept contains something besides the negation of the positive one2 for the things of which equality is denied are not abolished from consciousness by the denial4 ,and the fact overlooked by ,sir ,william ,hamilton1 is1 that the like holds even with those correlatives of which the negative is inconceivable1 in the strict sense of the word4 ,take for example the ,limited and the ,unlimited4 ,our notion of the ,limited is composed1 firstly of a consciousness of some kind of being1 and secondly of a consciousness of the limits under which it is known4 ,in the antithetical notion of the ,unlimited1 the consciousness of limits is abolished2 but not the consciousness of some kind of being4 ,it is quite true that in the absence of conceived limits1 this consciousness ceases to be a concept properly so called2 but it is none the less true that it remains as a mode of consciousness4 ,if1 in such cases1 the negative contradictory were1 as alleged1 8nothing else0 than the negation of the other1 and therefore a mere nonentity1 then it would clearly follow that negative contradictories could be used interchangeably3 the ,unlimited might be thought of as antithetical to the ,divisible2 and the ,indivisible as antithetical to the ,limited4 ,while the fact that they cannot be so used1 proves that in consciousness the ,unlimited and the ,indivisible are qualitatively distinct1 and therefore positive or real2 since distinction cannot exist between nothings4 ,the error1 7very naturally fallen into by philosophers intent on demonstrating the limits and conditions of consciousness17 consists in assuming that consciousness contains nothing but limits and conditions2 to the entire neglect of that which is limited and conditioned4 ,it is forgotten that there is something which alike forms the raw material of definite thought and remains after the definiteness which thinking gave to it has been destroyed4 ,now all this applies by change of terms to the last and highest of these antinomies--that between the ,relative and the ,non-relative4 ,we are conscious of the ,relative as existence under conditions and limits2 it is impossible that these conditions and limits can be thought of apart from something to which they give the form2 the abstraction of these conditions and limits1 is1 by the hypothesis1 the abstraction of them only2 consequently there must be a residuary consciousness of something which filled up their outlines2 and this indefinite something constitutes our consciousness of the ,non-relative or ,absolute4 ,impossible though it is to give to this consciousness any qualitative or quantitative expression whatever1 it is not the less certain that it remains with us as a positive and indestructible element of thought4 ,still more manifest will this truth become when it is observed that our conception of the ,relative itself disappears1 if our conception of the ,absolute is a pure negation4 ,it is admitted1 or rather it is contended1 by the writers ,i have quoted above1 that contradictories can be known only in relation to each other--that ,equality1 for instance1 is unthinkable apart from its correlative ,inequality2 and that thus the ,relative can itself be conceived only by opposition to the ,non-relative4 ,it is also admitted1 or rather contended1 that the consciousness of a relation implies a consciousness of both the related members4 ,if we are required to conceive the relation between the ,relative and ,non-relative without being conscious of both1 8we are in fact0 7to quote the words of ,mr ,mansel differently applied7 8required to compare that of which we are conscious with that of which we are not conscious2 the comparison itself being an act of consciousness1 and only possible through the consciousness of both its objects40 ,what then becomes of the assertion that 8the ,absolute is conceived merely by a negation of conceivability10 or as 8the mere absence of the conditions under which consciousness is possible80 ,if the ,non-relative or ,absolute1 is present in thought only as a mere negation1 then the relation between it and the ,relative becomes unthinkable1 because one of the terms of the relation is absent from consciousness4 ,and if this relation is unthinkable1 then is the ,relative itself unthinkable1 for want of its antithesis3 whence results the disappearance of all thought whatever4 ,let me here point out that both ,sir ,wm ,hamilton and ,mr ,mansel1 do1 in other places1 distinctly imply that our consciousness of the ,absolute1 indefinite though it is1 is positive and not negative4 ,the very passage already quoted from ,sir ,wm ,hamilton1 in which he asserts that 8the absolute is conceived merely by a negation of conceivability10 itself ends with the remark that1 8by a wonderful revelation1 we are thus1 in the very consciousness of our inability to conceive aught above the relative and finite1 inspired with a belief in the existence of something unconditioned beyond the sphere of all comprehensible reality40 ,the last of these assertions practically admits that which the other denies4 ,by the laws of thought as ,sir ,wm ,hamilton has interpreted them1 he finds himself forced to the conclusion that our consciousness of the ,absolute is a pure negation4 ,he nevertheless finds that there does exist in consciousness an irresistible conviction of the real 8existence of something unconditioned40 ,and he gets over the inconsistency by speaking of this conviction as 8a wonderful revelation0--8a belief0 with which we are 8inspired30 thus apparently hinting that it is supernaturally at variance with the laws of thought4 ,mr ,mansel is betrayed into a like inconsistency4 ,when he says that 8we are compelled1 by the constitution of our minds1 to believe in the existence of an ,absolute and ,infinite ,being1--a belief which appears forced upon us1 as the complement of our consciousness of the relative and the finite20 he clearly says by implication that this consciousness is positive1 and not negative4 ,he tacitly admits that we are obliged to regard the ,absolute as something more than a negation--that our consciousness of it is not 8the mere absence of the conditions under which consciousness is possible40 ,the supreme importance of this question must be my apology for taxing the reader's attention a little further1 in the hope of clearing up the remaining difficulties4 ,the necessarily positive character of our consciousness of the ,unconditioned1 which1 as we have seen1 follows from an ultimate law of thought1 will be better understood on contemplating the process of thought4 ,one of the arguments used to prove the relativity of our knowledge1 is1 that we cannot conceive ,space or ,time as either limited or unlimited4 ,it is pointed out that when we imagine a limit1 there simultaneously arises the consciousness of a space or time existing beyond the limit4 ,this remoter space or time1 though not contemplated as definite1 is yet contemplated as real4 ,though we do not form of it a conception proper1 since we do not bring it within bounds1 there is yet in our minds the unshaped material of a conception4 ,similarly with our consciousness of ,cause4 ,we are no more able to form a circumscribed idea of ,cause1 than of ,space or ,time2 and we are consequently obliged to think of the ,cause which transcends the limits of our thought as positive though indefinite4 ,just in the same manner that on conceiving any bounded space1 there arises a nascent consciousness of space outside the bounds2 so1 when we think of any definite cause1 there arises a nascent consciousness of a cause behind it3 and in the one case as in the other1 this nascent consciousness is in substance like that which suggests it1 though without form4 ,the momentum of thought inevitably carries us beyond conditioned existence to unconditioned existence2 and this ever persists in us as the body of a thought to which we can give no shape4 ,hence our firm belief in objective reality--a belief which metaphysical criticisms cannot for a moment shake4 ,when we are taught that a piece of matter1 regarded by us as existing externally1 cannot be really known1 but that we can know only certain impressions produced on us1 we are yet1 by the relativity of our thought1 compelled to think of these in relation to a positive cause--the notion of a real existence which generated these impressions becomes nascent4 ,if it be proved to us that every notion of a real existence which we can frame1 is utterly inconsistent with itself--that matter1 however conceived by us1 cannot be matter as it actually is1 our conception1 though transfigured1 is not destroyed3 there remains the sense of reality1 dissociated as far as possible from those special forms under which it was before represented in thought4 ,though ,philosophy condemns successively each attempted conception of the ,absolute--though it proves to us that the ,absolute is not this1 nor that1 nor that--though in obedience to it we negative1 one after another1 each idea as it arises2 yet1 as we cannot expel the entire contents of consciousness1 there ever remains behind an element which passes into new shapes4 ,the continual negation of each particular form and limit1 simply results in the more or less complete abstraction of all forms and limits2 and so ends in an indefinite consciousness of the unformed and unlimited4 ,and here we come face to face with the ultimate difficulty--,how can there possibly be constituted a consciousness of the unformed and unlimited1 when1 by its very nature1 consciousness is possible only under forms and limits8 ,if every consciousness of existence is a consciousness of existence as conditioned1 then how1 after the negation of conditions1 can there be any residuum84 ,though not directly withdrawn by the withdrawal of its conditions1 must not the raw material of consciousness be withdrawn by implication8 ,must it not vanish when the conditions of its existence vanish8 ,that there must be a solution of this difficulty is manifest2 since even those who would put it1 do1 as already shown1 admit that we have some such consciousness2 and the solution appears to be that above shadowed forth4 ,such consciousness is not1 and cannot be1 constituted by any single mental act2 but is the product of many mental acts4 ,in each concept there is an element which persists4 ,it is alike impossible for this element to be absent from consciousness1 and for it to be present in consciousness alone3 either alternative involves unconsciousness--the one from the want of the substance2 the other from the want of the form4 ,but the persistence of this element under successive conditions1 necessitates a sense of it as distinguished from the conditions1 and independent of them4 ,the sense of a something that is conditioned in every thought1 cannot be got rid of1 because the something cannot be got rid of4 ,how then must the sense of this something be constituted8 ,evidently by combining successive concepts deprived of their limits and conditions4 ,we form this indefinite thought1 as we form many of our definite thoughts1 by the coalescence of a series of thoughts4 ,let me illustrate this4 ,a large complex object1 having attributes too numerous to be represented at once1 is yet tolerably well conceived by the union of several representations1 each standing for part of its attributes4 ,on thinking of a piano1 there first rises in imagination its visual appearance1 to which are instantly added 7though by separate mental acts7 the ideas of its remote side and of its solid substance4 ,a complete conception1 however1 involves the strings1 the hammers1 the dampers1 the pedals2 and while successively adding these to the conception1 the attributes first thought of lapse more or less completely out of consciousness4 ,nevertheless1 the whole group constitutes a representation of the piano4 ,now as in this case we form a definite concept of a special existence1 by imposing limits and conditions in successive acts2 so1 in the converse case1 by taking away the limits and conditions in successive acts1 we form an indefinite notion of general existence4 ,by fusing a series of states of consciousness1 in each of which1 as it arises1 the limitations and conditions are abolished1 there is produced a consciousness of something unconditioned4 ,to speak more rigorously3--this consciousness is not the abstract of any one group of thoughts1 ideas1 or conceptions2 but it is the abstract of all thoughts1 ideas1 or conceptions4 ,that which is common to them all1 and cannot be got rid of1 is what we predicate by the word existence4 ,dissociated as this becomes from each of its modes by the perpetual change of those modes1 it remains as an indefinite consciousness of something constant under all modes--of being apart from its appearances4 ,the distinction we feel between special and general existence1 is the distinction between that which is changeable in us1 and that which is unchangeable4 ,the contrast between the ,absolute and the ,relative in our minds1 is really the contrast between that mental element which exists absolutely1 and those which exist relatively4 ,by its very nature1 therefore1 this ultimate mental element is at once necessarily indefinite and necessarily indestructible4 ,our consciousness of the unconditioned being literally the unconditioned consciousness1 or raw material of thought to which in thinking we give definite forms1 it follows that an ever-present sense of real existence is the very basis of our intelligence4 ,as we can in successive mental acts get rid of all particular conditions and replace them by others1 but cannot get rid of that undifferentiated substance of consciousness which is conditioned anew in every thought2 there ever remains with us a sense of that which exists persistently and independently of conditions4 ,at the same time that by the laws of thought we are rigorously prevented from forming a conception of absolute existence2 we are by the laws of thought equally prevented from ridding ourselves of the consciousness of absolute existence3 this consciousness being1 as we here see1 the obverse of our self-consciousness4 ,and since the only possible measure of relative validity among our beliefs1 is the degree of their persistence in opposition to the efforts made to change them1 it follows that this which persists at all times1 under all circumstances1 and cannot cease until consciousness ceases1 has the highest validity of any4 ,to sum up this somewhat too elaborate argument3--,we have seen how in the very assertion that all our knowledge1 properly so called1 is ,relative1 there is involved the assertion that there exists a ,non-relative4 ,we have seen how1 in each step of the argument by which this doctrine is established1 the same assumption is made4 ,we have seen how1 from the very necessity of thinking in relations1 it follows that the ,relative is itself inconceivable1 except as related to a real ,non-relative4 ,we have seen that unless a real ,non-relative or ,absolute be postulated1 the ,relative itself becomes absolute2 and so brings the argument to a contradiction4 ,and on contemplating the process of thought1 we have equally seen how impossible it is to get rid of the consciousness of an actuality lying behind appearances2 and how1 from this impossibility1 results our indestructible belief in that actuality4 ,,chapter ,v4 ,,the ,,reconciliation4 #bg4 ,thus do all lines of argument converge to the same conclusion4 ,the inference reached priori4 in the last chapter1 confirms the inferences which1 in the two preceding chapters1 were reached posteriori4 ,those imbecilities of the understanding that disclose themselves when we try to answer the highest questions of objective science1 subjective science proves to be necessitated by the laws of that understanding4 ,we not only learn by the frustration of all our efforts1 that the reality underlying appearances is totally and for ever inconceivable by us2 but we also learn why1 from the very nature of our intelligence1 it must be so4 ,finally we discover that this conclusion1 which1 in its unqualified form1 seems opposed to the instinctive convictions of mankind1 falls into harmony with them when the missing qualification is supplied4 ,though the ,absolute cannot in any manner or degree be known1 in the strict sense of knowing1 yet we find that its positive existence is a necessary datum of consciousness2 that so long as consciousness continues1 we cannot for an instant rid it of this datum2 and that thus the belief which this datum constitutes1 has a higher warrant than any other whatever4 ,here then is that basis of agreement we set out to seek4 ,this conclusion which objective science illustrates1 and subjective science shows to be unavoidable1--this conclusion which1 while it in the main expresses the doctrine of the ,english school of philosophy1 recognizes also a soul of truth in the doctrine of the antagonist ,german school--this conclusion which brings the results of speculation into harmony with those of common sense2 is also the conclusion which reconciles ,religion with ,science4 ,common ,sense asserts the existence of a reality2 ,objective ,science proves that this reality cannot be what we think it2 ,subjective ,science shows why we cannot think of it as it is1 and yet are compelled to think of it as existing2 and in this assertion of a ,reality utterly inscrutable in nature1 ,religion finds an assertion essentially coinciding with her own4 ,we are obliged to regard every phenomenon as a manifestation of some ,power by which we are acted upon2 phenomena being1 so far as we can ascertain1 unlimited in their diffusion1 we are obliged to regard this ,power as omnipresent2 and criticism teaches us that this ,power is wholly incomprehensible4 ,in this consciousness of an ,incomprehensible ,omnipresent ,power1 we have just that consciousness on which ,religion dwells4 ,and so we arrive at the point where ,religion and ,science coalesce4 ,to understand fully how real is the reconciliation thus reached1 it will be needful to look at the respective attitudes that ,religion and ,science have all along maintained towards this conclusion4 ,we must observe how1 all along1 the imperfections of each have been undergoing correction by the other2 and how the final out-come of their mutual criticisms1 can be nothing else than an entire agreement on this deepest and widest of all truths4 99 99 99 99 99 #bh4 ,in ,religion let us recognize the high merit that from the beginning it has dimly discerned the ultimate verity1 and has never ceased to insist upon it4 ,in its earliest and crudest forms it manifested1 however vaguely and inconsistently1 an intuition forming the germ of this highest belief in which all philosophies finally unite4 ,the consciousness of a mystery is traceable in the rudest fetishism4 ,each higher religious creed1 rejecting those definite and simple interpretations of ,nature previously given1 has become more religious by doing this4 ,as the quite concrete and conceivable agencies alleged as the causes of things1 have been replaced by agencies less concrete and conceivable1 the element of mystery has of necessity become more predominant4 ,through all its successive phases the disappearance of those positive dogmas by which the mystery was made unmysterious1 has formed the essential change delineated in religious history4 ,and so ,religion has ever been approximating towards that complete recognition of this mystery which is its goal4 ,for its essentially valid belief1 ,religion has constantly done battle4 ,gross as were the disguises under which it first espoused this belief1 and cherishing this belief1 though it still does1 under disfiguring vestments1 it has never ceased to maintain and defend it4 ,it has everywhere established and propagated one or other modification of the doctrine that all things are manifestations of a ,power that transcends our knowledge4 ,though from age to age1 ,science has continually defeated it wherever they have come in collision1 and has obliged it to relinquish one or more of its positions2 it has still held the remaining ones with undiminished tenacity4 ,no exposure of the logical inconsistency of its conclusions--no proof that each of its particular dogmas was absurd1 has been able to weaken its allegiance to that ultimate verity for which it stands4 ,after criticism has abolished all its arguments and reduced it to silence1 there has still remained with it the indestructible consciousness of a truth which1 however faulty the mode in which it had been expressed1 was yet a truth beyond cavil4 ,to this conviction its adherence has been substantially sincere4 ,and for the guardianship and diffusion of it1 ,humanity has ever been1 and must ever be1 its debtor4 ,but while from the beginning1 ,religion has had the all-essential office of preventing men from being wholly absorbed in the relative or immediate1 and of awakening them to a consciousness of something beyond it1 this office has been but very imperfectly discharged4 ,religion has ever been more or less irreligious2 and it continues to be partially irreligious even now4 ,in the first place1 as implied above1 it has all along professed to have some knowledge of that which transcends knowledge2 and has so contradicted its own teachings4 ,while with one breath it has asserted that the ,cause of all things passes understanding1 it has1 with the next breath1 asserted that the ,cause of all things possesses such or such attributes--can be in so far understood4 ,in the second place1 while in great part sincere in its fealty to the great truth it had had to uphold1 it has often been insincere1 and consequently irreligious1 in maintaining the untenable doctrines by which it has obscured this great truth4 ,each assertion respecting the nature1 acts1 or motives of that ,power which the ,universe manifests to us1 has been repeatedly called in question1 and proved to be inconsistent with itself1 or with accompanying assertions4 ,yet each of them has been age after age insisted on1 in spite of a secret consciousness that it would not bear examination4 ,just as though unaware that its central position was impregnable1 ,religion has obstinately held every outpost long after it was obviously indefensible4 ,and this naturally introduces us to the third and most serious form of irreligion which ,religion has displayed2 namely1 an imperfect belief in that which it especially professes to believe4 ,how truly its central position is impregnable1 ,religion has never adequately realized4 ,in the devoutest faith as we habitually see it1 there lies hidden an innermost core of scepticism2 and it is this scepticism which causes that dread of inquiry displayed by ,religion when face to face with ,science4 ,obliged to abandon one by one the superstitions it once tenaciously held1 and daily finding its cherished beliefs more and more shaken1 ,religion shows a secret fear that all things may some day be explained2 and thus itself betrays a lurking doubt whether that ,incomprehensible ,cause of which it is conscious1 is really incomprehensible4 ,of ,religion then1 we must always remember1 that amid its many errors and corruptions it has asserted and diffused a supreme verity4 ,from the first1 the recognition of this supreme verity1 in however imperfect a manner1 has been its vital element2 and its various defects1 once extreme but gradually diminishing1 have been so many failures to recognize in full that which it recognized in part4 ,the truly religious element of ,religion has always been good2 that which has proved untenable in doctrine and vicious in practice1 has been its irreligious element2 and from this it has been ever undergoing purification4 99 99 99 99 99 #bi4 ,and now observe that all along1 the agent which has effected the purification has been ,science4 ,we habitually overlook the fact that this has been one of its functions4 ,religion ignores its immense debt to ,science2 and ,science is scarcely at all conscious how much ,religion owes it4 ,yet it is demonstrable that every step by which ,religion has progressed from its first low conception to the comparatively high one it has now reached1 ,science has helped it1 or rather forced it1 to take2 and that even now1 ,science is urging further steps in the same direction4 ,using the word ,science in its true sense1 as comprehending all positive and definite knowledge of the order existing among surrounding phenomena1 it becomes manifest that from the outset1 the discovery of an established order has modified that conception of disorder1 or undetermined order1 which underlies every superstition4 ,as fast as experience proves that certain familiar changes always happen in the same sequence1 there begins to fade from the mind the conception of a special personality to whose variable will they were before ascribed4 ,and when1 step by step1 accumulating observations do the like with the less familiar changes1 a similar modification of belief takes place with respect to them4 ,while this process seems to those who effect1 and those who undergo it1 an anti-religious one1 it is really the reverse4 ,instead of the specific comprehensible agency before assigned1 there is substituted a less specific and less comprehensible agency2 and though this1 standing in opposition to the previous one1 cannot at first call forth the same feeling1 yet1 as being less comprehensible1 it must eventually call forth this feeling more fully4 ,take an instance4 ,of old the ,sun was regarded as the chariot of a god1 drawn by horses4 ,how far the idea thus grossly expressed1 was idealized1 we need not inquire4 ,it suffices to remark that this accounting for the apparent motion of the ,sun by an agency like certain visible terrestrial agencies1 reduced a daily wonder to the level of the commonest intellect4 ,when1 many centuries after1 ,kepler discovered that the planets moved round the ,sun in ellipses and described equal areas in equal times1 he concluded that in each planet there must exist a spirit to guide its movements4 ,here we see that with the progress of ,science1 there had disappeared the idea of a gross mechanical traction1 such as was first assigned in the case of the ,sun2 but that while for this there was substituted an indefinite and less-easily conceivable force1 it was still thought needful to assume a special personal agent as a cause of the regular irregularity of motion4 ,when1 finally1 it was proved that these planetary revolutions with all their variations and disturbances1 conformed to one universal law--when the presiding spirits which ,kepler conceived were set aside1 and the force of gravitation put in their place2 the change was really the abolition of an imaginable agency1 and the substitution of an unimaginable one4 ,for though the law of gravitation is within our mental grasp1 it is impossible to realize in thought the force of gravitation4 ,newton himself confessed the force of gravitation to be incomprehensible without the intermediation of an ether2 and1 as we have already seen1 7 #ah17 the assumption of an ether does not in the least help us4 ,thus it is with ,science in general4 ,its progress in grouping particular relations of phenomena under laws1 and these special laws under laws more and more general1 is of necessity a progress to causes that are more and more abstract4 ,and causes more and more abstract1 are of necessity causes less and less conceivable2 since the formation of an abstract conception involves the dropping of certain concrete elements of thought4 ,hence the most abstract conception1 to which ,science is ever slowly approaching1 is one that merges into the inconceivable or unthinkable1 by the dropping of all concrete elements of thought4 ,and so is justified the assertion1 that the beliefs which ,science has forced upon ,religion1 have been intrinsically more religious than those which they supplanted4 ,science however1 like ,religion1 has but very incompletely fulfilled its office4 ,as ,religion has fallen short of its function in so far as it has been irreligious2 so has ,science fallen short of its function in so far as it has been unscientific4 ,let us note the several parallelisms4 ,in its earlier stages1 ,science1 while it began to teach the constant relations of phenomena1 and so discredited the belief in separate personalities as the causes of them1 itself substituted the belief in causal agencies which1 if not personal1 were yet concrete4 ,when certain facts were said to show 8,nature's abhorrence of a vacuum10 when the properties of gold were explained as due to some entity called 8aureity10 and when the phenomena of life were attributed to 8a vital principle20 there was set up a mode of interpreting the facts1 which1 while antagonistic to the religious mode1 because assigning other agencies1 was also unscientific1 because it professed to know that about which nothing was known4 ,having abandoned these metaphysical agencies--having seen that they were not independent existences1 but merely special combinations of general causes1 ,science has more recently ascribed extensive groups of phenomena to electricity1 chemical affinity1 and other like general powers4 ,but in speaking of these as ultimate and independent entities1 ,science has preserved substantially the same attitude as before4 ,accounting thus for all phenomena1 those of ,life and ,thought included1 it has not only maintained its seeming antagonism to ,religion1 by alleging agencies of a radically unlike kind2 but1 in so far as it has tacitly assumed a knowledge of these agencies1 it has continued unscientific4 ,at the present time1 however1 the most advanced men of science are abandoning these later conceptions1 as their predecessors abandoned the earlier ones4 ,magnetism1 heat1 light c1 which were awhile since spoken of as so many distinct imponderables1 physicists are now beginning to regard as different modes of manifestation of some one universal force2 and in so doing are ceasing to think of this force as comprehensible4 ,in each phase of its progress1 ,science has thus stopped short with superficial solutions--has unscientifically neglected to ask what was the nature of the agents it so familiarly invoked4 ,though in each succeeding phase it has gone a little deeper1 and merged its supposed agents in more general and abstract ones1 it has still1 as before1 rested content with these as if they were ascertained realities4 ,and this1 which has all along been the unscientific characteristic of ,science1 has all along been a part cause of its conflict with ,religion4 99 99 99 99 99 #cj4 ,we see then that from the first1 the faults of both ,religion and ,science have been the faults of imperfect development4 ,originally a mere rudiment1 each has been growing into a more complete form2 the vice of each has in all times been its incompleteness2 the disagreements between them have throughout been nothing more than the consequences of their incompleteness2 and as they reach their final forms1 they come into entire harmony4 ,the progress of intelligence has throughout been dual4 ,though it has not seemed so to those who made it1 every step in advance has been a step towards both the natural and the supernatural4 ,the better interpretation of each phenomenon has been1 on the one hand1 the rejection of a cause that was relatively conceivable in its nature but unknown in the order of its actions1 and1 on the other hand1 the adoption of a cause that was known in the order of its actions but relatively inconceivable in its nature4 ,the first advance out of universal fetishism1 manifestly involved the conception of agencies less assimilable to the familiar agencies of men and animals1 and therefore less understood2 while1 at the same time1 such newly-conceived agencies in so far as they were distinguished by their uniform effects1 were better understood than those they replaced4 ,all subsequent advances display the same double result4 ,every deeper and more general power arrived at as a cause of phenomena1 has been at once less comprehensible than the special ones it superseded1 in the sense of being less definitely representable in thought2 while it has been more comprehensible in the sense that its actions have been more completely predicable4 ,the progress has thus been as much towards the establishment of a positively unknown as towards the establishment of a positively known4 ,though as knowledge approaches its culmination1 every unaccountable and seemingly supernatural fact1 is brought into the category of facts that are accountable or natural2 yet1 at the same time1 all accountable or natural facts are proved to be in their ultimate genesis unaccountable and supernatural4 ,and so there arise two antithetical states of mind1 answering to the opposite sides of that existence about which we think4 ,while our consciousness of ,nature under the one aspect constitutes ,science1 our consciousness of it under the other aspect constitutes ,religion4 ,otherwise contemplating the facts1 we may say that ,religion and ,science have been undergoing a slow differentiation2 and that their ceaseless conflicts have been due to the imperfect separation of their spheres and functions4 ,religion has1 from the first1 struggled to unite more or less science with its nescience2 ,science has1 from the first1 kept hold of more or less nescience as though it were a part of science4 ,each has been obliged gradually to relinquish that territory which it wrongly claimed1 while it has gained from the other that to which it had a right2 and the antagonism between them has been an inevitable accompaniment of this process4 ,a more specific statement will make this clear4 ,religion1 though at the outset it asserted a mystery1 also made numerous definite assertions respecting this mystery--professed to know its nature in the minutest detail2 and in so far as it claimed positive knowledge1 it trespassed upon the province of ,science4 ,from the times of early mythologies1 when such intimate acquaintance with the mystery was alleged1 down to our own days1 when but a few abstract and vague propositions are maintained1 ,religion has been compelled by ,science to give up one after another of its dogmas--of those assumed cognitions which it could not substantiate4 ,in the mean time1 ,science substituted for the personalities to which ,religion ascribed phenomena1 certain metaphysical entities2 and in doing this it trespassed on the province of ,religion2 since it classed among the things which it comprehended1 certain forms of the incomprehensible4 ,partly by the criticisms of ,religion1 which has occasionally called in question its assumptions1 and partly as a consequence of spontaneous growth1 ,science has been obliged to abandon these attempts to include within the boundaries of knowledge that which cannot be known2 and has so yielded up to ,religion that which of right belonged to it4 ,so long as this process of differentiation is incomplete1 more or less of antagonism must continue4 ,gradually as the limits of possible cognition are established1 the causes of conflict will diminish4 ,and a permanent peace will be reached when ,science becomes fully convinced that its explanations are proximate and relative2 while ,religion becomes fully convinced that the mystery it contemplates is ultimate and absolute4 ,religion and ,science are therefore necessary correlatives4 ,as already hinted1 they stand respectively for those two antithetical modes of consciousness which cannot exist asunder4 ,a known cannot be thought of apart from an unknown2 nor can an unknown be thought of apart from a known4 ,and by consequence neither can become more distinct without giving greater distinctness to the other4 ,to carry further a metaphor before used1--they are the positive and negative poles of thought2 of which neither can gain in intensity without increasing the intensity of the other4 99 99 99 99 99 #ca4 ,thus the consciousness of an ,inscrutable ,power manifested to us through all phenomena1 has been growing ever clearer2 and must eventually be freed from its imperfections4 ,the certainty that on the one hand such a ,power exists1 while on the other hand its nature transcends intuition and is beyond imagination1 is the certainty towards which intelligence has from the first been progressing4 ,to this conclusion ,science inevitably arrives as it reaches its confines2 while to this conclusion ,religion is irresistibly driven by criticism4 ,and satisfying as it does the demands of the most rigorous logic at the same time that it gives the religious sentiment the widest possible sphere of action1 it is the conclusion we are bound to accept without reserve or qualification4 ,some do indeed allege that though the ,ultimate ,cause of things cannot really be thought of by us as having specified attributes1 it is yet incumbent upon us to assert these attributes4 ,though the forms of our consciousness are such that the ,absolute cannot in any manner or degree be brought within them1 we are nevertheless told that we must represent the ,absolute to ourselves under these forms4 ,as writes ,mr ,mansel1 in the work from which ,i have already quoted largely--8,it is our duty1 then1 to think of ,god as personal2 and it is our duty to believe that ,he is infinite40 ,that this is not the conclusion here adopted1 needs hardly be said4 ,if there be any meaning in the foregoing arguments1 duty requires us neither to affirm nor deny personality4 ,our duty is to submit ourselves with all humility to the established limits of our intelligence2 and not perversely to rebel against them4 ,let those who can1 believe that there is eternal war set between our intellectual faculties and our moral obligations4 ,i for one1 admit no such radical vice in the constitution of things4 ,this which to most will seem an essentially irreligious position1 is an essentially religious one--nay is the religious one1 to which1 as already shown1 all others are but approximations4 ,in the estimate it implies of the ,ultimate ,cause1 it does not fall short of the alternative position1 but exceeds it4 ,those who espouse this alternative position1 make the erroneous assumption that the choice is between personality and something lower than personality2 whereas the choice is rather between personality and something higher4 ,is it not just possible that there is a mode of being as much transcending ,intelligence and ,will1 as these transcend mechanical motion8 ,it is true that we are totally unable to conceive any such higher mode of being4 ,but this is not a reason for questioning its existence2 it is rather the reverse4 ,have we not seen how utterly incompetent our minds are to form even an approach to a conception of that which underlies all phenomena8 ,is it not proved that this incompetency is the incompetency of the ,conditioned to grasp the ,unconditioned8 ,does it not follow that the ,ultimate ,cause cannot in any respect be conceived by us because it is in every respect greater than can be conceived8 ,and may we not therefore rightly refrain from assigning to it any attributes whatever1 on the ground that such attributes1 derived as they must be from our own natures1 are not elevations but degradations8 ,indeed it seems somewhat strange that men should suppose the highest worship to lie in assimilating the object of their worship to themselves4 ,not in asserting a transcendant difference1 but in asserting a certain likeness1 consists the element of their creed which they think essential4 ,it is true that from the time when the rudest savages imagined the causes of all things to be creatures of flesh and blood like themselves1 down to our own time1 the degree of assumed likeness has been diminishing4 ,but though a bodily form and substance similar to that of man1 has long since ceased1 among cultivated races1 to be a literally-conceived attribute of the ,ultimate ,cause--though the grosser human desires have been also rejected as unfit elements of the conception--though there is some hesitation in ascribing even the higher human feelings1 save in greatly idealized shapes2 yet it is still thought not only proper1 but imperative1 to ascribe the most abstract qualities of our nature4 ,to think of the ,creative ,power as in all respects anthropomorphous1 is now considered impious by men who yet hold themselves bound to think of the ,creative ,power as in some respects anthropomorphous2 and who do not see that the one proceeding is but an evanescent form of the other4 ,and then1 most marvellous of all1 this course is persisted in even by those who contend that we are wholly unable to frame any conception whatever of the ,creative ,power4 ,after it has been shown that every supposition respecting the genesis of the ,universe commits us to alternative impossibilities of thought--after it has been shown that each attempt to conceive real existence ends in an intellectual suicide--after it has been shown why1 by the very constitution of our minds1 we are eternally debarred from thinking of the ,absolute2 it is still asserted that we ought to think of the ,absolute thus and thus4 ,in all imaginable ways we find thrust upon us the truth1 that we are not permitted to know--nay are not even permitted to conceive--that ,reality which is behind the veil of ,appearance2 and yet it is said to be our duty to believe 7and in so far to conceive7 that this ,reality exists in a certain defined manner4 ,shall we call this reverence8 or shall we call it the reverse8 ,volumes might be written upon the impiety of the pious4 ,through the printed and spoken thoughts of religious teachers1 may almost everywhere be traced a professed familiarity with the ultimate mystery of things1 which1 to say the least of it1 seems anything but congruous with the accompanying expressions of humility4 ,and surprisingly enough1 those tenets which most clearly display this familiarity1 are those insisted upon as forming the vital elements of religious belief4 ,the attitude thus assumed1 can be fitly represented only by further developing a simile long current in theological controversies--the simile of the watch4 ,if for a moment we made the grotesque supposition that the tickings and other movements of a watch constituted a kind of consciousness2 and that a watch possessed of such a consciousness1 insisted on regarding the watchmaker's actions as determined like its own by springs and escapements2 we should simply complete a parallel of which religious teachers think much4 ,and were we to suppose that a watch not only formulated the cause of its existence in these mechanical terms1 but held that watches were bound out of reverence so to formulate this cause1 and even vituperated1 as atheistic watches1 any that did not venture so to formulate it2 we should merely illustrate the presumption of theologians by carrying their own argument a step further4 ,a few extracts will bring home to the reader the justice of this comparison4 ,we are told1 for example1 by one of high repute among religious thinkers1 that the ,universe is 8the manifestation and abode of a ,free ,mind1 like our own2 embodying ,his personal thought in its adjustments1 realizing ,his own ideal in its phenomena1 just as we express own inner faculty and character through the natural language of an external life4 ,in this view1 we interpret ,nature by ,humanity2 we find the key to her aspects in such purposes and affections as our own consciousness enables us to conceive2 we look everywhere for physical signals of an ever-living ,will2 and decipher the universe as the autobiography of an ,infinite ,spirit1 repeating itself in miniature within our ,finite ,spirit40 ,the same writer goes still further4 ,he not only thus parallels the assimilation of the watchmaker to the watch1--he not only thinks the created can 8decipher0 8the autobiography0 of the ,creating2 but he asserts that the necessary limits of the one are necessary limits of the other4 ,the primary qualities of bodies1 he says1 8belong eternally to the material datum objective to ,god0 and control his acts2 while the secondary ones are 8products of pure ,inventive ,reason and ,determining ,will0--constitute 8the realm of ,divine originality40 99 99 99 8,while on this ,secondary field ,his ,mind and ours are thus contrasted1 they meet in resemblance again upon the ,primary3 for the evolutions of deductive ,reason there is but one track possible to all intelligences2 no merum arbitrium can interchange the false and true1 or make more than one geometry1 one scheme of pure ,physics1 for all worlds2 and the ,omnipotent ,architect ,himself1 in realizing the ,kosmical conception1 in shaping the orbits out of immensity and determining seasons out of eternity1 could but follow the laws of curvature1 measure and proportion40 ,that is to say1 the ,ultimate ,cause is like a human mechanic1 not only as 8shaping0 the 8material datum objective to0 ,him1 but also as being obliged to conform to the necessary properties of that 8datum40 ,nor is this all4 ,there follows some account of 8the ,divine psychology10 to the extent of saying that 8we learn0 8the character of ,god--the order of affections in ,him0 from 8the distribution of authority in the hierarchy of our impulses40 ,in other words1 it is alleged that the ,ultimate ,cause has desires that are to be classed as higher and lower like our own4#g ,every one has heard of the king who wished he had been present at the creation of the world1 that he might have given good advice4 ,he was humble however compared with those who profess to understand not only the relation of the ,creating to the created1 but also how the ,creating is constituted4 ,and yet this transcendant audacity1 which claims to penetrate the secrets of the ,power manifested to us through all existence--nay even to stand behind that ,power and note the conditions to its action--this it is which passes current as piety6 ,may we not without hesitation affirm that a sincere recognition of the truth that our own and all other existence is a mystery absolutely and for ever beyond our comprehension1 contains more of true religion than all the dogmatic theology ever written8 ,meanwhile let us recognize whatever of permanent good there is in these persistent attempts to frame conceptions of that which cannot be conceived4 ,from the beginning it has been only through the successive failures of such conceptions to satisfy the mind1 that higher and higher ones have been gradually reached2 and doubtless1 the conceptions now current are indispensable as transitional modes of thought4 ,even more than this may be willingly conceded4 ,it is possible1 nay probable1 that under their most abstract forms1 ideas of this order will always continue to occupy the background of our consciousness4 ,very likely there will ever remain a need to give shape to that indefinite sense of an ,ultimate ,existence1 which forms the basis of our intelligence4 ,we shall always be under the necessity of contemplating it as some mode of being2 that is--of representing it to ourselves in some form of thought1 however vague4 ,and we shall not err in doing this so long as we treat every notion we thus frame as merely a symbol1 utterly without resemblance to that for which it stands4 ,perhaps the constant formation of such symbols and constant rejection of them as inadequate1 may be hereafter1 as it has hitherto been1 a means of discipline4 ,perpetually to construct ideas requiring the utmost stretch of our faculties1 and perpetually to find that such ideas must be abandoned as futile imaginations1 may realize to us more fully than any other course1 the greatness of that which we vainly strive to grasp4 ,such efforts and failures may serve to maintain in our minds a due sense of the incommensurable difference between the ,conditioned and the ,unconditioned4 ,by continually seeking to know and being continually thrown back with a deepened conviction of the impossibility of knowing1 we may keep alive the consciousness that it is alike our highest wisdom and our highest duty to regard that through which all things exist as ,the ,unknowable4 99 99 99 99 99 #cb4 ,an immense majority will refuse with more or less of indignation1 a belief seeming to them so shadowy and indefinite4 ,having always embodied the ,ultimate ,cause so far as was needful to its mental realization1 they must necessarily resent the substitution of an ,ultimate ,cause which cannot be mentally realized at all4 8,you offer us10 they say1 8an unthinkable abstraction in place of a ,being towards whom we may entertain definite feelings4 ,though we are told that the ,absolute is real1 yet since we are not allowed to conceive it1 it might as well be a pure negation4 ,instead of a ,power which we can regard as having some sympathy with us1 you would have us contemplate a ,power to which no emotion whatever can be ascribed4 ,and so we are to be deprived of the very substance of our faith40 ,this kind of protest of necessity accompanies every change from a lower creed to a higher4 ,the belief in a community of nature between himself and the object of his worship1 has always been to man a satisfactory one2 and he has always accepted with reluctance those successively less concrete conceptions which have been forced upon him4 ,doubtless1 in all times and places1 it has consoled the barbarian to think of his deities as so exactly like himself in nature1 that they could be bribed by offerings of food2 and the assurance that deities could not be so propitiated1 must have been repugnant1 because it deprived him of an easy method of gaining supernatural protection4 ,to the ,greeks it was manifestly a source of comfort that on occasions of difficulty they could obtain1 through oracles1 the advice of their gods1--nay1 might even get the personal aid of their gods in battle2 and it was probably a very genuine anger which they visited upon philosophers who called in question these gross ideas of their mythology4 ,a religion which teaches the ,hindoo that it is impossible to purchase eternal happiness by placing himself under the wheel of ,juggernaut1 can scarcely fail to seem a cruel one to him2 since it deprives him of the pleasurable consciousness that he can at will exchange miseries for joys4 ,nor is it less clear that to our ,catholic ancestors1 the beliefs that crimes could be compounded for by the building of churches1 that their own punishments and those of their relatives could be abridged by the saying of masses1 and that divine aid or forgiveness might be gained through the intercession of saints1 were highly solacing ones2 and that ,protestantism1 in substituting the conception of a ,god so comparatively unlike ourselves as not to be influenced by such methods1 must have appeared to them hard and cold4 ,naturally1 therefore1 we must expect a further step in the same direction to meet with a similar resistance from outraged sentiments4 ,no mental revolution can be accomplished without more or less of laceration4 ,be it a change of habit or a change of conviction1 it must1 if the habit or conviction be strong1 do violence to some of the feelings2 and these must of course oppose it4 ,for long-experienced1 and therefore definite1 sources of satisfaction1 have to be substituted sources of satisfaction that have not been experienced1 and are therefore indefinite4 ,that which is relatively well known and real1 has to be given up for that which is relatively unknown and ideal4 ,and of course such an exchange cannot be made without a conflict involving pain4 ,especially then must there arise a strong antagonism to any alteration in so deep and vital a conception as that with which we are here dealing4 ,underlying1 as this conception does1 all others1 a modification of it threatens to reduce the superstructure to ruins4 ,or to change the metaphor--being the root with which are connected our ideas of goodness1 rectitude1 or duty1 it appears impossible that it should be transformed without causing these to wither away and die4 ,the whole higher part of the nature almost of necessity takes up arms against a change which1 by destroying the established associations of thought1 seems to eradicate morality4 ,this is by no means all that has to be said for such protests4 ,there is a much deeper meaning in them4 ,they do not simply express the natural repugnance to a revolution of belief1 here made specially intense by the vital importance of the belief to be revolutionized2 but they also express an instinctive adhesion to a belief that is in one sense the best--the best for those who thus cling to it1 though not abstractedly the best4 ,for here let me remark that what were above spoken of as the imperfections of ,religion1 at first great but gradually diminishing1 have been imperfections only as measured by an absolute standard2 and not as measured by a relative one4 ,speaking generally1 the religion current in each age and among each people1 has been as near an approximation to the truth as it was then and there possible for men to receive3 the more or less concrete forms in which it has embodied the truth1 have simply been the means of making thinkable what would otherwise have been unthinkable2 and so have for the time being served to increase its impressiveness4 ,if we consider the conditions of the case1 we shall find this to be an unavoidable conclusion4 ,during each stage of evolution1 men must think in such terms of thought as they possess4 ,while all the conspicuous changes of which they can observe the origins1 have men and animals as antecedents1 they are unable to think of antecedents in general under any other shapes2 and hence creative agencies are of necessity conceived by them in these shapes4 ,if during this phase1 these concrete conceptions were taken from them1 and the attempt made to give them comparatively abstract conceptions1 the result would be to leave their minds with none at all2 since the substituted ones could not be mentally represented4 ,similarly with every successive stage of religious belief1 down to the last4 ,though1 as accumulating experiences slowly modify the earliest ideas of causal personalities1 there grow up more general and vague ideas of them2 yet these cannot be at once replaced by others still more general and vague4 ,further experiences must supply the needful further abstractions1 before the mental void left by the destruction of such inferior ideas can be filled by ideas of a superior order4 ,and at the present time1 the refusal to abandon a relatively concrete notion for a relatively abstract one1 implies the inability to frame the relatively abstract one2 and so proves that the change would be premature and injurious4 ,still more clearly shall we see the injuriousness of any such premature change1 on observing that the effects of a belief upon conduct must be diminished in proportion as the vividness with which it is realized becomes less4 ,evils and benefits akin to those which the savage has personally felt1 or learned from those who have felt them1 are the only evils and benefits he can understand2 and these must be looked for as coming in ways1 like those of which he has had experience4 ,his deities must be imagined to have like motives and passions and methods with the beings around him2 for motives and passions and methods of a higher character1 being unknown to him1 and in great measure unthinkable by him1 cannot be so realized in thought as to influence his deeds4 ,during every phase of civilization1 the actions of the ,unseen ,reality1 as well as the resulting rewards and punishments1 being conceivable only in such forms as experience furnishes1 to supplant them by higher ones before wider experiences have made higher ones conceivable1 is to set up vague and uninfluential motives for definite and influential ones4 ,even now1 for the great mass of men1 unable through lack of culture to trace out with due clearness those good and bad consequences which conduct brings round through the established order of the ,unknowable1 it is needful that there should be vividly depicted future torments and future joys--pains and pleasures of a definite kind1 produced in a manner direct and simple enough to be clearly imagined4 ,nay still more must be conceded4 ,few if any are as yet fitted wholly to dispense with such conceptions as are current4 ,the highest abstractions take so great a mental power to realize with any vividness1 and are so inoperative upon conduct unless they are vividly realized1 that their regulative effects must for a long period to come be appreciable on but a small minority4 ,to see clearly how a right or wrong act generates consequences1 internal and external1 that go on branching out more widely as years progress1 requires a rare power of analysis4 ,to mentally represent even a single series of these consequences1 as it stretches out into the remote future1 requires an equally rare power of imagination4 ,and to estimate these consequences in their totality1 ever multiplying in number while diminishing in intensity1 requires a grasp of thought possessed by none4 ,yet it is only by such analysis1 such imagination1 and such grasp1 that conduct can be rightly guided in the absence of all other control3 only so can ultimate rewards and penalties be made to outweigh proximate pains and pleasures4 ,indeed1 were it not that throughout the progress of the race1 men's experiences of the effects of conduct have been slowly generalized into principles--were it not that these principles have been from generation to generation insisted on by parents1 upheld by public opinion1 sanctified by religion1 and enforced by threats of eternal damnation for disobedience--were it not that under these potent influences1 habits have been modified1 and the feelings proper to them made innate--were it not1 in short1 that we have been rendered in a considerable degree organically moral2 it is certain that disastrous results would ensue from the removal of those strong and distinct motives which the current belief supplies4 ,even as it is1 those who relinquish the faith in which they have been brought up1 for this most abstract faith in which ,science and ,religion unite1 may not uncommonly fail to act up to their convictions4 ,left to their organic morality1 enforced only by general reasonings imperfectly wrought out and difficult to keep before the mind1 their defects of nature will often come out more strongly than they would have done under their previous creed4 ,the substituted creed can become adequately operative only when it becomes1 like the present one1 an element in early education1 and has the support of a strong social sanction4 ,nor will men be quite ready for it until1 through the continuance of a discipline which has already partially moulded them to the conditions of social existence1 they are completely moulded to those conditions4 ,we must therefore recognize the resistance to a change of theological opinion1 as in great measure salutary4 ,it is not simply that strong and deep-rooted feelings are necessarily excited to antagonism--it is not simply that the highest moral sentiments join in the condemnation of a change which seems to undermine their authority2 but it is that a real adaptation exists between an established belief and the natures of those who defend it2 and that the tenacity of the defence measures the completeness of the adaptation4 ,forms of religion1 like forms of government1 must be fit for those who live under them2 and in the one case as in the other1 that form which is fittest is that for which there is an instinctive preference4 ,as certainly as a barbarous race needs a harsh terrestrial rule1 and habitually shows attachment to a despotism capable of the necessary rigour2 so certainly does such a race need a belief in a celestial rule that is similarly harsh1 and habitually shows attachment to such a belief4 ,and just in the same way that the sudden substitution of free institutions for tyrannical ones1 is sure to be followed by a reaction2 so1 if a creed full of dreadful ideal penalties is all at once replaced by one presenting ideal penalties that are comparatively gentle1 there will inevitably be a return to some modification of the old belief4 ,the parallelism holds yet further4 ,during those early stages in which there is an extreme incongruity between the relatively best and the absolutely best1 both political and religious changes1 when at rare intervals they occur1 are necessarily violent2 and necessarily entail violent retrogressions4 ,but as the incongruity between that which is and that which should be1 diminishes1 the changes become more moderate1 and are succeeded by more moderate retrogressions2 until1 as these movements and counter-movements decrease in amount and increase in frequency1 they merge into an almost continuous growth4 ,that adhesion to old institutions and beliefs1 which1 in primitive societies1 opposes an iron barrier to any advance1 and which1 after the barrier has been at length burst through1 brings back the institutions and beliefs from that too-forward position to which the momentum of change had carried them1 and so helps to re-adapt social conditions to the popular character--this adhesion to old institution and beliefs1 eventually becomes the constant check by which the constant advance is prevented from being too rapid4 ,this holds true of religious creeds and forms1 as of civil ones4 ,and so we learn that theological conservatism1 like political conservatism1 has an all-important function4 99 99 99 99 99 #cc4 ,that spirit of toleration which is so marked a characteristic of modern times1 and is daily growing more conspicuous1 has thus a far deeper meaning than is supposed4 ,what we commonly regard simply as a due respect for the right of private judgment1 is really a necessary condition to the balancing of the progressive and conservative tendencies--is a means of maintaining the adaptation between men's beliefs and their natures4 ,it is therefore a spirit to be fostered2 and it is a spirit which the catholic thinker1 who perceives the functions of these various conflicting creeds1 should above all other men display4 ,doubtless whoever feels the greatness of the error to which his fellows cling and the greatness of the truth which they reject1 will find it hard to show a due patience4 ,it is hard for him to listen calmly to the futile arguments used in support of irrational doctrines1 and to the misrepresentation of antagonist doctrines4 ,it is hard for him to bear the manifestation of that pride of ignorance which so far exceeds the pride of science4 ,naturally enough such a one will be indignant when charged with irreligion because he declines to accept the carpenter-theory of creation as the most worthy one4 ,he may think it needless as it is difficult1 to conceal his repugnance to a creed which tacitly ascribes to ,the ,unknowable a love of adulation such as would be despised in a human being4 ,convinced as he is that all punishment1 as we see it wrought out in the order of nature1 is but a disguised beneficence1 there will perhaps escape from him an angry condemnation of the belief that punishment is a divine vengeance1 and that divine vengeance is eternal4 ,he may be tempted to show his contempt when he is told that actions instigated by an unselfish sympathy or by a pure love of rectitude1 are intrinsically sinful2 and that conduct is truly good only when it is due to a faith whose openly-professed motive is other-worldliness4 ,but he must restrain such feelings4 ,though he may be unable to do this during the excitement of controversy1 or when otherwise brought face to face with current superstitions1 he must yet qualify his antagonism in calmer moments2 so that his mature judgment and resulting conduct may be without bias4 ,to this end let him ever bear in mind three cardinal facts--two of them already dwelt upon1 and one still to be pointed out4 ,the first is that with which we set out2 namely the existence of a fundamental verity under all forms of religion1 however degraded4 ,in each of them there is a soul of truth4 ,through the gross body of dogmas traditions and rites which contain it1 it is always visible--dimly or clearly as the case may be4 ,this it is which gives vitality even to the rudest creed2 this it is which survives every modification2 and this it is which we must not forget when condemning the forms under which it is presented4 ,the second of these cardinal facts1 set forth at length in the foregoing section1 is1 that while those concrete elements in which each creed embodies this soul of truth1 are bad as measured by an absolute standard1 they are good as measured by a relative standard4 ,though from higher perceptions they hide the abstract verity within them2 yet to lower perceptions they render this verity more appreciable than it would otherwise be4 ,they serve to make real and influential over men1 that which would else be unreal and uninfluential4 ,or we may call them the protective envelopes1 without which the contained truth would die4 ,the remaining cardinal fact is1 that these various beliefs are parts of the constituted order of things2 and not accidental but necessary parts4 ,seeing how one or other of them is everywhere present2 is of perennial growth2 and when cut down1 redevelops in a form but slightly modified2 we cannot avoid the inference that they are needful accompaniments of human life1 severally fitted to the societies in which they are indigenous4 ,from the highest point of view1 we must recognize them as elements in that great evolution of which the beginning and end are beyond our knowledge or conception--as modes of manifestation of ,the ,unknowable2 and as having this for their warrant4 ,our toleration therefore should be the widest possible4 ,or rather1 we should aim at something beyond toleration1 as commonly understood4 ,in dealing with alien beliefs1 our endeavour must be1 not simply to refrain from injustice of word or deed2 but also to do justice by an open recognition of positive worth4 ,we must qualify our disagreement with as much as may be of sympathy4 99 99 99 99 99 #cd4 ,these admissions will perhaps be held to imply1 that the current theology should be passively accepted2 or1 at any rate1 should not be actively opposed4 8,why10 it may be asked1 8if all creeds have an average fitness to their times and places1 should we not rest content with that to which we are born8 ,if the established belief contains an essential truth--if the forms under which it presents this truth1 though intrinsically bad1 are extrinsically good--if the abolition of these forms would be at present detrimental to the great majority--nay1 if there are scarcely any to whom the ultimate and most abstract belief can furnish an adequate rule of life2 surely it is wrong1 for the present at least1 to propagate this ultimate and most abstract belief40 ,the reply is1 that though existing religious ideas and institutions have an average adaptation to the characters of the people who live under them2 yet1 as these characters are ever changing1 the adaptation is ever becoming imperfect2 and the ideas and institutions need remodelling with a frequency proportionate to the rapidity of the change4 ,hence1 while it is requisite that free play should be given to conservative thought and action1 progressive thought and action must also have free play4 ,without the agency of both1 there cannot be those continual re-adaptations which orderly progress demands4 ,whoever hesitates to utter that which he thinks the highest truth1 lest it should be too much in advance of the time1 may reassure himself by looking at his acts from an impersonal point of view4 ,let him duly realize the fact that opinion is the agency through which character adapts external arrangements to itself--that his opinion rightly forms part of this agency--is a unit of force1 constituting1 with other such units1 the general power which works out social changes2 and he will perceive that he may properly give full utterance to his innermost conviction3 leaving it to produce what effect it may4 ,it is not for nothing that he has in him these sympathies with some principles and repugnance to others4 ,he1 with all his capacities1 and aspirations1 and beliefs1 is not an accident1 but a product of the time4 ,he must remember that while he is a descendant of the past1 he is a parent of the future2 and that his thoughts are as children born to him1 which he may not carelessly let die4 ,he1 like every other man1 may properly consider himself as one of the myriad agencies through whom works the ,unknown ,cause2 and when the ,unknown ,cause produces in him a certain belief1 he is thereby authorized to profess and act out that belief4 ,for1 to render in their highest sense the words of the poet-- ----,nature is made better by no mean1 ,but nature makes that mean3 over that art ,which you say adds to nature1 is an art ,that nature makes4 ,not as adventitious therefore will the wise man regard the faith which is in him4 ,the highest truth he sees he will fearlessly utter2 knowing that1 let what may come of it1 he is thus playing his right part in the world--knowing that if he can effect the change he aims at--well3 if not--well also2 though not so well4 ----- ,footnote #g3 ,these extracts are from an article entitled 8,nature and ,god10 published in the ,national ,review for ,october1 #ahfj4 ,,part ,,ii4 ,,laws ,,of ,,the ,,knowable4 ,,chapter ,i4 ,,laws ,,in ,,general4 #ce4 ,we have seen that intellectual advance has been dual--has been towards the establishment of both a positively unknown and a positively known4 ,in making ever more certain the inaccessibility of one kind of truth1 experience has made ever more certain the accessibility of another kind4 ,the differentiation of the knowable from the unknowable1 is shown as much in the reduction of the one to perfect clearness1 as in the reduction of the other to impenetrable mystery4 ,progressing enlightenment discloses a definite limit to human intelligence2 and while all which lies on the other side of the limit1 is1 with increasing distinctness1 seen to transcend our finite faculties1 it grows more and more obvious that all which lies on this side of the limit may become an indisputable possession4 ,to speak specifically--it has been shown that though we can never learn the nature of that which is manifested to us1 we are daily learning more completely the order of its manifestations4 ,we are conscious of effects produced in us by something separate from ourselves4 ,the effects of which we are conscious--the changes of consciousness which make up our mental life1 we ascribe to the forces of an external world4 ,the intrinsic character of these forces--of this external world--of that which underlies all appearances1 we find inscrutable2 as is also the internal something whose changes constitute consciousness1 but at the same time we find that among the changes of consciousness thus produced1 there exist various constant relations2 and we have no choice but to ascribe constancy to the relations which subsist among the inscrutable causes of these changes4 ,observation early discloses certain invariable connexions of coexistence and sequence among phenomena4 ,accumulating experiences tend continually to augment the number of invariable connexions recognized4 ,when1 as in the later stages of civilization1 there arises not only a diligent gathering together of experiences but a critical comparison of them1 more remote and complex connexions are added to the list4 ,and gradually there grows up the habit of regarding these uniformities of relation as characterizing all manifestations of the ,unknowable4 ,under the endless variety and seeming irregularity1 there is ever more clearly discerned that 8constant course of procedure0 which we call ,law4 ,the growing belief in the universality of ,law1 is so conspicuous to all cultivated minds as scarcely to need illustration4 ,none who read these pages will ask for proof that this has been the central element of intellectual progress4 ,but though the fact is sufficiently familiar1 the philosophy of the fact is not so2 and it will be desirable now to consider it4 ,partly because the development of our conception of ,law will so be rendered more comprehensible2 but chiefly because our subsequent course will thus be facilitated2 ,i propose here to enumerate the several conditions that determine the order in which the various relations among phenomena are discovered4 ,seeing1 as we shall1 the consequent necessity of this order2 and enabled1 as we shall also be1 to estimate the future by inference from the past2 we shall perceive how inevitable is our advance towards the ultimatum that has been indicated4 99 99 99 99 99 #cf4 ,the recognition of ,law1 being the recognition of uniformity of relations among phenomena1 it follows that the order in which different groups of phenomena are reduced to law1 must depend on the frequency and distinctness with which the uniform relations they severally present1 are experienced4 ,at any given stage of progress1 those uniformities will be most recognized with which men's minds have been oftenest and most strongly impressed4 ,in proportion partly to the number of times a relation has been presented to consciousness 7not merely to the senses72 and in proportion partly to the vividness with which the terms of the relation have been cognized2 will be the degree in which the constancy of connexion is perceived4 ,the frequency and impressiveness with which different classes of relations are repeated in conscious experience1 thus primarily determining the succession in which they are generalized1 there result certain derivative principles to which this succession must more immediately and obviously conform4 ,first in importance comes the directness with which personal welfare is affected4 ,while1 among surrounding things1 many do not appreciably influence the body in any way1 some act detrimentally and some beneficially1 in various degrees2 and manifestly1 those things whose actions on the organism are most influential1 will1 cteris paribus1 be those whose laws of action are earliest observed4 ,second in order1 is the conspicuousness of one or both the phenomena between which a relation is to be perceived4 ,on every side are countless phenomena so concealed as to be detected only by close observation2 others not obtrusive enough to attract notice2 others which moderately solicit the attention2 others so imposing or vivid as to force themselves upon consciousness2 and supposing incidental conditions to be the same1 these last will of course be among the first to have their relations generalized4 ,in the third place1 we have the absolute frequency with which the relations occur4 ,there are coexistences and sequences of all degrees of commonness1 from those which are ever present to those which are extremely rare2 and it is clear that the rare coexistences and sequences1 as well as the sequences which are very long in taking place1 will not be reduced to law so soon as those which are familiar and rapid4 ,fourthly has to be added the relative frequency of occurrence4 ,many events and appearances are more or less limited to times and places2 and as a relation which does not exist within the environment of an observer1 cannot be cognized by him1 however common it may be elsewhere or in another age1 we have to take account of the surrounding physical circumstances1 as well as the state of society1 of the arts1 and of the sciences--all of which affect the frequency with which certain groups of facts are exposed to observation4 ,the fifth corollary to be noticed1 is1 that the succession in which different classes of phenomena are reduced to law1 depends in part on their simplicity4 ,phenomena presenting great composition of causes or conditions1 have their essential relations so masked1 that it requires accumulated experiences to impress upon consciousness the true connexion of antecedents and consequents they involve4 ,hence1 other things equal1 the progress of generalization will be from the simple to the complex2 and this it is which ,m4 ,comte has wrongly asserted to be the sole regulative principle of the progress4 ,sixth1 and last1 comes the degree of abstractness4 ,concrete relations are the earliest acquisitions4 ,the colligation of any group of these into a general relation1 which is the first step in abstraction1 necessarily comes later than the discovery of the relations colligated4 ,the union of a number of these lowest generalizations into a higher and more abstract generalization1 is necessarily subsequent to the formation of such lowest generalizations4 ,and so on continually1 until the highest and most abstract generalizations have been reached4 ,these then are the several derivative principles4 ,the frequency and vividness with which uniform relations are repeated in conscious experience1 determining the recognition of their uniformity2 and this frequency and vividness depending on the above conditions2 it follows that the order in which different classes of facts are generalized1 must depend on the extent to which the above conditions are fulfilled in each class4 ,let us mark how the facts harmonize with this conclusion3 taking first a few that elucidate the general truth1 and afterwards some that are illustrative of the several special truths which we here see follow from it4 99 99 99 99 99 #cg4 ,the relations earliest known as uniformities1 are those subsisting between the common physical properties of matter--tangibility1 visibility1 cohesion1 weight c4 ,we have no trace of an era in human history when the resistance offered by every visible object1 was regarded as caused by the will of the object2 or when the pressure of a body on the hand supporting it1 was ascribed to the direct agency of a living being4 ,and accordingly1 we see that these are the relations oftenest repeated in consciousness2 being as they are1 objectively frequent1 conspicuous1 simple1 concrete1 and of immediate personal concern4 ,similarly with respect to the ordinary phenomena of motion4 ,the fall of a mass on the withdrawal of its support1 is a sequence which directly affects bodily welfare1 is conspicuous1 simple1 concrete1 and very often repeated4 ,hence it is one of the uniformities recognized before the dawn of tradition4 ,we know of no time when movements due to terrestrial gravitation were attributed to volition4 ,only when the relation is obscured--only1 as in the case of an aerolite1 where the antecedent of the descent is unperceived1 do we find the fetishistic conception persistent4 ,on the other hand1 motions of intrinsically the same order as that of a falling stone--those of the heavenly bodies--long remain ungeneralized2 and until their uniformity is seen1 are construed as results of will4 ,this difference is clearly not dependent on comparative complexity or abstractness2 since the motion of a planet in an ellipse1 is as simple and concrete a phenomenon as the motion of a projected arrow in a parabola4 ,but the antecedents are not conspicuous2 the sequences are of long duration2 and they are infrequently repeated4 ,hence in a given period1 there cannot be the same multiplied experiences of them4 ,and that this is the chief cause of their slow reduction to law1 we see in the fact that they are severally generalized in the order of their frequency and conspicuousness--the moon's monthly cycle1 the sun's annual change1 the periods of the inferior planets1 the periods of the superior planets4 ,while astronomical sequences were still ascribed to volition1 certain terrestrial sequences of a different kind1 but some of them equally without complication1 were interpreted in like manner4 ,the solidification of water at a low temperature1 is a phenomenon that is simple1 concrete1 and of much personal concern4 ,but it is neither so frequent as those which we saw are earliest generalized1 nor is the presence of the antecedent so uniformly conspicuous4 ,though in all but tropical climates1 mid-winter displays the relation between cold and freezing with tolerable constancy2 yet1 during the spring and autumn1 the occasional appearance of ice in the mornings has no very manifest connexion with coldness of the weather4 ,sensation being so inaccurate a measure1 it is not possible for the savage to experience the definite relation between a temperature of #cb and the congealing of water2 and hence the long-continued conception of personal agency4 ,similarly1 but still more clearly1 with the winds4 ,the absence of regularity and the inconspicuousness of the antecedents1 allowed the mythological explanation to survive for a great period4 ,during the era in which the uniformity of many quite simple inorganic relations was still unrecognized1 certain classes of organic relations1 intrinsically very complex and special1 were generalized4 ,the constant coexistence of feathers and a beak1 of four legs with a bony internal framework1 of a particular leaf with poisonous berries1 are facts which were1 and are1 familiar to every savage4 ,did a savage find a bird with teeth1 or a mammal clothed with feathers1 he would be as much surprised as an instructed naturalist2 and would probably make a fetish of the anomalous form3 so showing that while the exceptional relation suggested the notion of a personal cause1 the habitual relation did not4 ,now these uniformities of organic structure which are so early perceived1 are of exactly the same class as those more numerous ones later established by biology4 ,the constant coexistence of mammary glands with two occipital condyles in the skull1 of vertebr with teeth lodged in sockets1 of frontal horns with the habit of rumination1 are generalizations as purely empirical as those known to the aboriginal hunter4 ,the vegetal physiologist cannot in the least understand the complex relation between the kind of leaf and the kind of fruit borne by a particular plant3 he knows these and like connexions simply in the same manner that the barbarian knows them4 ,but the fact that sundry of the uniform relations which chiefly make up the organic sciences1 were very early recognized1 is due to the high degree of vividness and frequency with which they were presented to consciousness4 ,though the connexion between the form of a given creature and the sound it makes1 or the quality of its fur1 or the nature of its flesh1 is extremely involved2 yet the two terms of the relation are conspicuous2 are usually observed in close juxtaposition in time and space2 are so observed perhaps daily1 or many times a day2 and above all a knowledge of their connexion has a direct and obvious bearing on personal welfare4 ,meanwhile1 we see that innumerable other relations of exactly the same order1 which are displayed with even greater frequency by surrounding plants and animals1 remain for thousands of years unrecognized1 if they are unobtrusive or of no apparent moment4 ,when1 passing from this primitive stage to a more advanced stage1 we trace the discovery of those less familiar uniformities which constitute what is technically distinguished as ,science1 we find the order of discovery to be still determined in the same manner4 ,we shall most clearly see this in contemplating separately the influence of each derivative condition2 as was proposed in the last section4 99 99 99 99 99 #ch4 ,how relations that have an immediate bearing on the maintenance of life1 are1 other things equal1 necessarily fixed in the mind before those which have no such immediate bearing1 is abundantly illustrated in the history of ,science4 ,the habits of existing uncivilized races1 who fix times by moons and barter so many of one article for so many of another1 show us that numeration1 which is the germ of mathematical science1 commenced under the immediate pressure of personal wants2 and it can scarcely be doubted that those laws of numerical relations which are embodied in the rules of arithmetic1 were first brought to light through the practice of mercantile exchange4 ,similarly with ,geometry4 ,the derivation shows us that it originally included only certain methods of partitioning ground and laying out buildings4 ,the properties of the scales and the lever1 involving the first principle in mechanics1 were early generalized under the stimulus of commercial and architectural needs4 ,to fix the times of religious festivals and agricultural operations1 were the motives which led to the establishment of the simpler astronomic periods4 ,such small knowledge of chemical relations as was involved in ancient metallurgy1 was manifestly obtained in seeking how to improve tools and weapons4 ,in the alchemy of later times1 we see how greatly an intense hope of private benefit contributed to the disclosure of a certain class of uniformities4 ,nor is our own age barren of illustrations4 8,here10 says ,humboldt when in ,guiana1 8as in many parts of ,europe1 the sciences are thought worthy to occupy the mind1 only so far as they confer some immediate and practical benefit on society40 8,how is it possible to believe10 said a missionary to him1 8that you have left your country to come and be devoured by mosquitoes on this river1 and to measure lands that are not your own40 ,our coasts furnish like instances4 ,every sea-side naturalist knows how great is the contempt with which fishermen regard the collection of objects for the microscope or aquarium3 their incredulity as to the possible value of such things1 being so great1 that they can scarcely be induced even by bribes to preserve the refuse of their nets4 ,nay1 we need not go for evidence beyond daily table-talk4 ,the demand for 8practical science0--for a knowledge that can be brought to bear on the business of life2 joined to the ridicule commonly vented on pursuits that have no obvious use2 suffice to show that the order in which different coexistences and sequences are discovered1 greatly depends on the directness with which they affect our welfare4 ,that1 when all other conditions are the same1 obtrusive relations will be generalized before unobtrusive ones1 is so nearly a truism that examples appear almost superfluous4 ,if it be admitted that by the aboriginal man1 as by the child1 the co-existent properties of large surrounding objects are noticed before those of minute objects2 and that the external relations which bodies present are generalized before their internal ones2 it must be admitted that in all subsequent stages of progress1 the comparative conspicuousness of relations has greatly affected the order in which they were recognized as uniform4 ,hence it happened that after the establishment of those very manifest sequences constituting a lunation1 and those less manifest ones marking a year1 and those still less manifest ones marking the planetary periods1 ,astronomy occupied itself with such inconspicuous sequences as those displayed in the repeating cycle of lunar eclipses1 and those which suggested the theory of epicycles and eccentrics2 while modern ,astronomy deals with still more inconspicuous sequences3 some of which1 as the planetary rotations1 are nevertheless the simplest which the heavens present4 ,in ,physics1 the early use of canoes implied an empirical knowledge of certain hydrostatic relations that are intrinsically more complex than sundry static relations then unknown2 but these hydrostatic relations were thrust upon observation4 ,or if we compare the solution of the problem of specific gravity by ,archimedes1 with the discovery of atmospheric pressure by ,torricelli1 7the two involving mechanical relations of exactly the same kind17 we perceive that the much earlier occurrence of the first than the last1 was determined neither by a difference in their bearings on personal welfare1 nor by a difference in the frequency with which illustrations of them come under observation1 nor by relative simplicity2 but solely by the greater obtrusiveness of the connexion between antecedent and consequent in the one case than in the other4 ,similarly with ,chemistry4 ,the burning of wood1 the rusting of iron1 the putrefaction of dead bodies1 were early known as consequents uniformly related to certain antecedents2 but not until long after was there reached a like empirical knowledge of the effect produced by air in the decomposition of soil3 a phenomenon of equal simplicity1 equal or greater importance1 and greater frequency2 but one that is extremely unobtrusive4 ,among miscellaneous illustrations1 it may be pointed out that the connexions between lightning and thunder and between rain and clouds1 were established long before others of the same order2 simply because they thrust themselves on the attention4 ,or the long-delayed discovery of the microscopic forms of life1 with all the phenomena they present1 may be named as very clearly showing how certain groups of relations that are not ordinarily perceptible1 though in all other respects like long-familiar relations1 have to wait until changed conditions render them perceptible4 ,but1 without further details1 it needs only to consider the inquiries which now occupy the electrician1 the chemist1 the physiologist1 to see that ,science has advanced and is advancing from the more conspicuous phenomena to the less conspicuous ones4 ,how the degree of absolute frequency of a relation affects the recognition of its uniformity1 we see in contrasting certain biological facts4 ,death and disease are near akin in most of their relations to us2 while in respect of complexity1 conspicuousness1 and the directness with which they personally concern us1 diseases in general may be put pretty nearly on a level with each other4 ,but there are great differences in the times at which the natural sequences they severally exhibit are recognized as such4 ,the connexion between death and bodily injury1 constantly displayed not only in men but in all inferior creatures1 was known as an established uniformity while yet diseases were thought supernatural4 ,among diseases themselves1 it is observable that comparatively unusual ones were regarded as of demoniacal origin during ages when the more frequent were ascribed to ordinary causes3 a truth paralleled indeed among our own peasantry1 who by the use of charms show a lingering superstition with respect to rare disorders1 which they do not show with respect to common ones1 such as colds4 ,passing to physical illustrations1 we may note that within the historic period1 whirlpools were accounted for by the agency of water-spirits2 but we do not find that within the same period the disappearance of water on exposure either to the sun or to artificial heat was interpreted in an analogous way3 though a much more marvellous occurrence1 and a much more complex one1 its great frequency led to the early establishment of it as a natural uniformity4 ,rainbows and comets do not differ greatly in conspicuousness1 and a rainbow is intrinsically the more involved phenomenon2 but chiefly because of their far greater commonness1 rainbows were perceived to have a direct dependence on sun and rain while yet comets were regarded as supernatural appearances4 ,that races living inland must long have remained ignorant of the daily and monthly sequences of the tides1 and that intertropical races could not early have comprehended the phenomena of northern winters1 are extreme illustrations of the influence which relative frequency has on the recognition of uniformities4 ,animals which1 where they are indigenous1 call forth no surprise by their structure or habits1 because these are so familiar1 when taken to a part of the earth where they have never been seen1 are looked at with an astonishment approaching to awe--are even thought supernatural3 a fact which will suggest numerous others that show how the localization of phenomena1 in part controls the order in which they are reduced to law4 ,not only however does their localization in space affect the progression1 but also their localization in time4 ,facts which are rarely if ever manifested during one era1 are rendered very frequent in another1 simply through the changes wrought by civilization4 ,the lever1 of which the properties are illustrated in the use of sticks and weapons1 is vaguely understood by every savage--on applying it in a certain way he rightly anticipates certain effects2 but the action of the equally simple wedge1 which is not commonly displayed till tool-making has made some progress1 is less early generalized2 while the wheel and axle1 pulley1 and screw1 cannot have their powers either empirically or rationally known till the advance of the arts has more or less familiarized them4 ,through those various means of exploration which we have inherited and are ever increasing1 we have become acquainted with a vast range of chemical relations that were relatively non-existent to the primitive man3 to highly developed industries we owe both the substances and the apparatus that have disclosed to us countless uniformities which our ancestors had no opportunity of seeing1 and therefore could not recognize4 ,these and sundry like instances that will occur to the reader1 show that the accumulated materials1 and processes1 and appliances1 and products1 which characterize the environments of complex societies1 greatly increase the accessibility of various classes of relations2 and by so multiplying the experiences of them1 or making them relatively frequent1 facilitate their generalization4 ,to which add1 that various classes of phenomena presented by society itself1 as for instance those which political economy formulates1 become relatively frequent and therefore recognizable in advanced social states2 while in less advanced ones they are too rarely displayed to have their relations perceived1 or1 as in the least advanced ones1 are not displayed at all4 ,that1 where no other circumstances interfere1 the order in which different uniformities are established varies as their complexity1 is manifest4 ,the geometry of straight lines was understood before the geometry of curved lines2 the properties of the circle before the properties of the ellipse1 parabola and hyperbola2 and the equations of curves of single curvature were ascertained before those of curves of double curvature4 ,plane trigonometry comes in order of time and simplicity before spherical trigonometry2 and the mensuration of plane surfaces and solids before the mensuration of curved surfaces and solids4 ,similarly with mechanics3 the laws of simple motion were generalized before those of compound motion2 and those of rectilinear motion before those of curvilinear motion4 ,the properties of equal-armed levers1 or scales1 were understood before those of the lever with unequal arms2 and the law of the inclined plane was formulated earlier than that of the screw1 which involves it4 ,in chemistry1 the progress has been from the simple inorganic compounds1 to the more involved organic ones4 ,and where1 as in most of the other sciences1 the conditions of the exploration are more complicated1 we still may clearly trace relative complexity as one of the determining circumstances4 ,the progression from concrete relations to abstract ones1 and from the less abstract to the more abstract1 is equally obvious4 ,numeration1 which in its primary form concerned itself only with groups of actual objects1 came earlier than simple arithmetic3 the rules of which deal with numbers apart from objects4 ,arithmetic1 limited in its sphere to concrete numerical relations1 is alike earlier and less abstract than ,algebra1 which deals with the relations of these relations4 ,and in like manner1 the ,infinitesimal ,calculus comes after ,algebra1 both in order of evolution and in order of abstractness4 ,in ,astronomy1 the progress has been from special generalizations1 each expressing the motions of a particular planet1 to the generalizations of ,kepler1 expressing the motions of the planets at large2 and then to ,newton's generalization1 expressing the motions of all heavenly bodies whatever4 ,similarly with ,physics1 ,chemistry and ,biology1 there has ever been an advance from the relations of particular facts and particular classes of facts1 to the relations presented by still wider classes--to truths of a high generality or greater abstractness4 ,brief and rude as is this sketch of a mental development that has been long and complicated1 it fulfils its end if it displays the several conditions that have regulated the course of the development4 ,i venture to think it shows inductively1 what was deductively inferred1 that the order in which separate groups of uniformities are recognized1 depends not on one circumstance but on several circumstances4 ,a survey of the facts makes it manifest that the various classes of relations are generalized in a certain succession1 not solely because of one particular kind of difference in their natures2 but also because they are variously placed with respect to time1 space1 other relations1 and our own constitutions3 our perception of them being influenced by all these conditions in endless combinations4 ,the comparative degrees of importance1 of obtrusiveness1 of absolute frequency1 of relative frequency1 of simplicity1 of concreteness1 are every one of them factors2 and from their union in proportions that are more or less different in every case1 there results a highly complex process of mental evolution4 ,but while it thus becomes manifest that the proximate causes of the succession in which relations are reduced to law1 are numerous and involved2 it also becomes manifest that there is one ultimate cause to which these proximate ones are subordinate4 ,as the several circumstances that determine the early or late recognition of uniformities1 are circumstances that determine the number and strength of the impressions which these uniformities make on the mind2 it follows that the progression conforms to a certain fundamental principle of psychology4 ,we see posteriori1 what we concluded priori1 that the order in which relations are generalized1 depends on the frequency and impressiveness with which they are repeated in conscious experience4 99 99 99 99 99 #ci4 ,and now to observe the bearings of these truths on our general argument4 ,having roughly analyzed the progress of the past1 let us take advantage of the light thus thrown on the present1 and consider what is implied respecting the future4 ,note first that the likelihood of the universality of ,law1 has been ever growing greater4 ,out of the countless coexistences and sequences with which mankind are environed1 they have been continually transferring some from the group whose order was supposed to be arbitrary1 to the group whose order is known to be uniform4 ,age by age1 the number of recognized connexions of phenomena has been increasing2 and that of unrecognized connexions decreasing4 ,and manifestly1 as fast as the class of ungeneralized relations becomes smaller1 the probability that among them there may be some that do not conform to law1 becomes less4 ,to put the argument numerically--,it is clear that when out of surrounding phenomena a hundred of several kinds have been found to occur in constant connexions1 there arises a slight presumption that all phenomena occur in constant connexions4 ,when uniformity has been established in a thousand cases1 more varied in their kinds1 the presumption gains strength4 ,and when the established cases of uniformity mount to myriads1 including many of each variety1 it becomes an ordinary induction that uniformity exists everywhere4 ,just as from the numerous observed cases in which heavenly bodies have been found to move in harmony with the law of gravitation1 it is inferred that all heavenly bodies move in harmony with the law of gravitation2 so1 from the innumerable observed cases in which phenomena are found to stand in invariable connexions1 it is inferred that in all cases phenomena stand in invariable connexions4 ,silently and insensibly their experiences have been pressing men on towards the conclusion thus drawn4 ,not out of a conscious regard for these abstract reasons1 but from a habit of thought which these abstract reasons formulate and justify1 all minds have been advancing towards a belief in the constancy of surrounding coexistences and sequences4 ,familiarity with special uniformities1 has generated the abstract conception of uniformity--the idea of ,law2 and this idea has been in successive generations slowly gaining fixity and clearness4 ,especially has it been thus among those whose knowledge of natural phenomena is the most extensive--men of science4 ,the ,mathematician1 the ,physicist1 the ,astronomer1 the ,chemist1 severally acquainted with the vast accumulations of uniformities established by their predecessors1 and themselves daily adding new ones as well as verifying the old1 acquire a far stronger faith in ,law than is ordinarily possessed4 ,with them this faith1 ceasing to be merely passive1 becomes an active stimulus to inquiry4 ,wherever there exist phenomena of which the dependence is not yet ascertained1 these most cultivated intellects1 impelled by the conviction that here too there is some invariable connexion1 proceed to observe1 compare1 and experiment2 and when they discover the law to which the phenomena conform1 as they eventually do1 their general belief in the universality of law is further strengthened4 ,so overwhelming is the evidence1 and such the effect of this discipline1 that to the advanced student of nature1 the proposition that there are lawless phenomena1 has become not only incredible but almost inconceivable4 ,hence we may see how inevitably there must spread among mankind at large1 this habitual recognition of law which already distinguishes modern thought from ancient thought4 ,not only is it that each conquest of generalization over a region of fact hitherto ungeneralized1 and each merging of lower generalizations in a higher one1 adds to the distinctness of this recognition among those immediately concerned--not only is it that the fulfilment of the predictions made possible by every new step1 and the further command so gained of nature's forces1 prove to the uninitiated the validity of these generalizations and the doctrine they illustrate2 but it is that widening education is daily diffusing among the mass of men1 that knowledge of generalizations which has been hitherto confined to the few4 ,and as fast as this diffusion goes on1 must the belief of the scientific become the belief of the world at large4 ,the simple accumulation of instances1 must inevitably establish in the general mind1 a conviction of the universality of law2 even were the influence of this accumulation to be aided by no other4 99 99 99 99 99 #dj4 ,but it will be aided by another4 ,from the evidence above set forth1 it may be inferred that a secondary influence will by and by enforce this primary one4 ,that law is universal1 will become an irresistible conclusion when it is perceived that the progress in the discovery of laws itself conforms to law2 and when it is hence understood why certain groups of phenomena have been reduced to law1 while other groups are still unreduced4 ,when it is seen that the order in which uniformities are recognized1 must depend upon the frequency and vividness with which they are repeated in conscious experience2 when it is seen that1 as a matter of fact1 the most common1 important1 conspicuous1 concrete and simple uniformities were the earliest recognized1 because they were experienced oftenest and most distinctly2 when it is further seen that from the beginning the advance has been to the recognition of uniformities which1 from one or other circumstance1 were less often experienced2 it will by implication be seen that long after the great mass of phenomena have been generalized1 there must remain phenomena which1 from their rareness1 or unobtrusiveness1 or seeming unimportance1 or complexity1 or abstractness1 are still ungeneralized4 ,thus will be furnished a solution to a difficulty sometimes raised4 ,when it is asked why the universality of law is not already fully established1 there will be the answer that the directions in which it is not yet established are those in which its establishment must necessarily be latest4 ,that state of things which is inferable beforehand1 is just the state which we find to exist4 ,if such coexistences and sequences as those of ,biology and ,sociology are not yet reduced to law1 the presumption is not that they are irreducible to law1 but that their laws elude our present means of analysis4 ,having long ago proved uniformity throughout all the lower classes of relations2 and having been step by step proving uniformity throughout classes of relations successively higher and higher2 if we have not at present succeeded with the highest classes1 it may be fairly concluded that our powers are at fault1 rather than that the uniformity does not exist4 ,and unless we make the absurd assumption that the process of generalization1 now going on with unexampled rapidity1 has reached its limit1 and will suddenly cease1 we must infer that ultimately mankind will discover a constant order of manifestation even in the most involved1 obscure1 and abstract phenomena4 99 99 99 99 99 #da4 ,not even yet1 however1 have we exhausted the evidence4 ,the foregoing arguments have to be merged in another1 still more cogent1 which fuses all fragmentary proofs into one general proof4 ,thus far we have spoken of laws that are more or less special2 and from the still-continuing disclosure of special laws1 each formulating some new class of phenomena1 have inferred that eventually all classes of phenomena will be formulated4 ,if1 now1 we find that there are laws of far higher generality1 to which those constituting the body of ,science are subordinate2 the fact must greatly strengthen the proof that ,law is universal4 ,if1 underneath different groups of concrete phenomena1 ,mechanical1 ,chemical1 ,thermal1 ,electric1 c41 we discern certain uniformities of action common to them all2 we have a new and weighty reason for believing that uniformity of action pervades the whole of nature4 ,and if we also see that these most general laws hold not only of the inorganic but of the organic worlds--if we see that the phenomena of ,life1 of ,mind1 of ,society1 whose special laws are yet unestablished1 nevertheless conform to these most general laws2 the proof of the universality of ,law amounts to demonstration4 ,that there are laws of this transcendant generality1 has now to be shown4 ,to specify and illustrate them1 will be the purpose of the succeeding chapters4 ,and while1 in contemplating them1 we shall perceive how irresistible is the conclusion that the workings of the ,unknowable are distinguished from those of finite agents by their absolute uniformity2 we shall at the same time familiarize ourselves with those primary facts through which all other facts are to be interpreted4 ,,chapter ,,ii4 ,,the ,,law ,,of ,,evolution4#h #db4 ,the class of phenomena to be considered under the title of ,evolution1 is in a great measure co-extensive with the class commonly indicated by the word ,progress4 ,but the word ,progress is here inappropriate1 for several reasons4 ,to specify these reasons will perhaps be the best way of showing what is to be understood by ,evolution4 ,in the first place1 the current conception of ,progress is shifting and indefinite4 ,sometimes it comprehends little more than simple growth--as of a nation in the number of its members and the extent of territory over which it has spread4 ,at other times it has reference to quantity of material products--as when the advance of agriculture and manufactures is the topic4 ,now the superior quality of these products is contemplated2 and then the new or improved appliances by which they are produced4 ,when1 again1 we speak of moral or intellectual progress1 we refer to the state of the individual or people exhibiting it2 while1 when the progress of ,knowledge1 of ,science1 of ,art1 is commented upon1 we have in view certain abstract results of human thought and action4 ,in the second place1 besides being more or less vague1 the ordinary idea of ,progress is in great measure erroneous4 ,it takes in not so much the reality as its accompaniments--not so much the substance as the shadow4 ,that progress in intelligence seen during the growth of the child into the man1 or the savage into the philosopher1 is commonly regarded as consisting in the greater number of facts known and laws understood2 whereas the actual progress consists in those internal modifications of which this increased knowledge is the expression4 ,social progress is supposed to consist in the produce of a greater quantity and variety of the articles required for satisfying men's wants--in the increasing security of person and property--in widening freedom of action2 whereas1 rightly understood1 social progress consists in those changes of structure in the social organism which have entailed these consequences4 ,the interpretation is a teleological one4 ,the phenomena are contemplated solely as bearing on human happiness4 ,only those changes are held to constitute progress1 which directly or indirectly tend to heighten human happiness4 ,and they are thought to constitute progress simply because they tend to heighten human happiness4 ,in the third place1 in consequence of its teleological implications1 the term ,progress is rendered scarcely applicable to a wide range of phenomena which are intrinsically of the same nature as those included under it4 ,the metamorphoses of an insect are only by analogy admitted within the scope of the word1 as popularly accepted2 though1 considered in themselves1 they have as much right there as the changes which constitute civilization4 ,having no apparent bearing on human interests1 an increasing complication in the arrangement of ocean-currents1 would not ordinarily be regarded as progress2 though really of the same character as phenomena which are so regarded4 ,hence the need for another word4 ,our purpose here is to analyze the various class of changes usually considered as ,progress1 together with others like them which are not so considered2 and to see what is their intrinsic peculiarity--what is their essential nature apart from their bearings on our welfare4 ,and that we may avoid the confusion of thought likely to result from pre-established associations1 it will be best to substitute for the term ,progress1 the term ,evolution4 ,our question is then--what is ,evolution8 99 99 99 99 99 #dc4 ,in respect to that evolution which individual organisms display1 this question has been answered4 ,pursuing an idea which ,harvey set afloat1 ,wolff1 ,goethe1 and ,von ,baer1 have established the truth that the series of changes gone through during the development of a seed into a tree1 or an ovum into an animal1 constitute an advance from homogeneity of structure to heterogeneity of structure4 ,in its primary stage1 every germ consists of a substance that is uniform throughout1 both in texture and chemical composition4 ,the first step is the appearance of a difference between two parts of this substance2 or1 as the phenomenon is called in physiological language1 a differentiation4 ,each of these differentiated divisions presently begins itself to exhibit some contrast of parts2 and by and by these secondary differentiations become as definite as the original one4 ,this process is continuously repeated--is simultaneously going on in all parts of the growing embryo2 and by endless such differentiations there is finally produced that complex combination of tissues and organs1 constituting the adult animal or plant4 ,this is the history of all organisms whatever4 ,it is settled beyond dispute that organic evolution consists in a change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous4 ,now ,i propose in the first place to show1 that this law of organic evolution is the law of all evolution4 ,whether it be in the development of the ,earth1 in the development of ,life upon its surface1 in the development of ,society1 of ,government1 of ,manufactures1 of ,commerce1 of ,language1 ,literature1 ,science1 ,art1 this same advance from the simple to the complex1 through successive differentiations1 holds uniformly4 ,from the earliest traceable cosmical changes down to the latest results of civilization1 we shall find that the transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous1 is that in which ,evolution essentially consists4 99 99 99 99 99 #dd4 ,with the view of showing that if the ,nebular ,hypothesis be true1 the genesis of the solar system supplies one illustration of this law1 let us assume that the matter of which the sun and planets consist was once in a diffused form2 and that from the gravitation of its atoms there resulted a gradual concentration4 ,by the hypothesis1 the solar system in its nascent state existed as an indefinitely extended and nearly homogeneous medium--a medium almost homogeneous in density1 in temperature1 and in other physical attributes4 ,the first advance towards consolidation resulted in a differentiation between the occupied space which the nebulous mass still filled1 and the unoccupied space which it previously filled4 ,there simultaneously resulted a contrast in density and a contrast in temperature1 between the interior and the exterior of this mass4 ,and at the same time there arose throughout it1 rotatory movements1 whose velocities varied according to their distances from its centre4 ,these differentiations increased in number and degree until there was evolved the organized group of sun1 planets1 and satellites1 which we now know--a group which presents numerous contrasts of structure and action among its members4 ,there are the immense contrasts between the sun and the planets1 in bulk and in weight2 as well as the subordinate contrasts between one planet and another1 and between the planets and their satellites4 ,there is the similarly marked contrast between the sun as almost stationary1 and the planets as moving round him with great velocity2 while there are the secondary contrasts between the velocities and periods of the several planets1 and between their simple revolutions and the double ones of their satellites1 which have to move round their primaries while moving round the sun4 ,there is the yet further strong contrast between the sun and the planets in respect of temperature2 and there is reason to suppose that the planets and satellites differ from each other in their proper heat1 as well as in the heat they receive from the sun4 ,when we bear in mind that1 in addition to these various contrasts1 the planets and satellites also differ in respect to their distances from each other and their primary2 in respect to the inclinations of their orbits1 the inclinations of their axes1 their times of rotation on their axes1 their specific gravities1 and their physical constitutions2 we see what a high degree of heterogeneity the solar system exhibits1 when compared with the almost complete homogeneity of the nebulous mass out of which it is supposed to have originated4 99 99 99 99 99 #de4 ,passing from this hypothetical illustration1 which must be taken for what it is worth1 without prejudice to the general argument1 let us descend to a more certain order of evidence4 ,it is now generally agreed among geologists that the ,earth was at first a mass of molten matter2 and that it is still fluid and incandescent at the distance of a few miles beneath its surface4 ,originally1 then1 it was homogeneous in consistence1 and1 because of the circulation that takes place in heated fluids1 must have been comparatively homogeneous in temperature2 and it must have been surrounded by an atmosphere consisting partly of the elements of air and water1 and partly of those various other elements which assume a gaseous form at high temperatures4 ,that slow cooling by radiation which is still going on at an inappreciable rate1 and which1 though originally far more rapid than now1 necessarily required an immense time to produce any decided change1 must ultimately have resulted in the solidification of the portion most able to part with its heat2 namely1 the surface4 ,in the thin crust thus formed1 we have the first marked differentiation4 ,a still further cooling1 a consequent thickening of this crust1 and an accompanying deposition of all solidifiable elements contained in the atmosphere1 must finally have been followed by the condensation of the water previously existing as vapour4 ,a second marked differentiation must thus have arisen2 and as the condensation must have taken place on the coolest parts of the surface--namely1 about the poles--there must thus have resulted the first geographical distinction of parts4 ,to these illustrations of growing heterogeneity1 which1 though deduced from the known laws of matter1 may be regarded as more or less hypothetical1 ,geology adds an extensive series that have been inductively established4 ,its investigations show that the ,earth has been continually becoming more heterogeneous through the multiplication of the strata which form its crust2 further1 that it has been becoming more heterogeneous in respect of the composition of these strata1 the latter of which1 being made from the detritus of the older ones1 are many of them rendered highly complex by the mixture of materials they contain2 and that this heterogeneity has been vastly increased by the action of the ,earth's still molten nucleus upon its envelope3 whence have resulted not only a great variety of igneous rocks1 but the tilting up of sedimentary strata at all angles1 the formation of faults and metallic veins1 the production of endless dislocations and irregularities4 ,yet again1 geologists teach us that the ,earth's surface has been growing more varied in elevation--that the most ancient mountain systems are the smallest1 and the ,andes and ,himalayas the most modern2 while1 in all probability1 there have been corresponding changes in the bed of the ocean4 ,as a consequence of these ceaseless differentiations1 we now find that no considerable portion of the ,earth's exposed surface is like any other portion1 either in contour1 in geologic structure1 or in chemical composition2 and that in most parts it changes from mile to mile in all these characteristics4 ,moreover1 it must not be forgotten that there has been simultaneously going on a gradual differentiation of climates4 ,as fast as the ,earth cooled and its crust solidified1 there arose appreciable differences in temperature between those parts of its surface most exposed to the sun and those less exposed4 ,gradually1 as the cooling progressed1 these differences became more pronounced2 until there finally resulted the marked contrasts between regions of perpetual ice and snow1 regions where winter and summer alternately reign for periods varying according to the latitude1 and regions where summer follows summer with scarcely an appreciable variation4 ,at the same time1 the successive elevations and subsidences of different portions of the ,earth's crust1 tending as they have done to the present irregular distribution of land and sea1 have entailed various modifications of climate beyond those dependent on latitude2 while a yet further series of such modifications have been produced by increasing differences of elevation in the land1 which have in sundry places brought arctic1 temperate1 and tropical climates to within a few miles of each other4 ,and the general result of these changes is1 that not only has every extensive region its own meteorologic conditions1 but that every locality in each region differs more or less from others in those conditions3 as in its structure1 its contour1 its soil4 ,thus1 between our existing ,earth1 the phenomena of whose varied crust neither geographers1 geologists1 mineralogists nor meteorologists have yet enumerated1 and the molten globe out of which it was evolved1 the contrast in heterogeneity is sufficiently striking4 99 99 99 99 99 #df4 ,when from the ,earth itself we turn to the plants and animals that have lived1 or still live1 upon its surface1 we find ourselves in some difficulty from lack of facts4 ,that every existing organism has been developed out of the simple into the complex1 is indeed the first established truth of all2 and that every organism which has existed was similarly developed1 is an inference that no physiologist will hesitate to draw4 ,but when we pass from individual forms of life to ,life in general1 and inquire whether the same law is seen in the ensemble of its manifestations1--whether modern plants and animals are of more heterogeneous structure than ancient ones1 and whether the ,earth's present ,flora and ,fauna are more heterogeneous than the ,flora and ,fauna of the past1--we find the evidence so fragmentary1 that every conclusion is open to dispute4 ,two-thirds of the ,earth's surface being covered by water2 a great part of the exposed land being inaccessible to1 or untravelled by1 the geologist2 the greater part of the remainder having been scarcely more than glanced at2 and even the most familiar portions1 as ,england1 having been so imperfectly explored1 that a new series of strata has been added within these few years1--it is manifestly impossible for us to say with any certainty what creatures have1 and what have not1 existed at any particular period4 ,considering the perishable nature of many of the lower organic forms1 the metamorphosis of many sedimentary strata1 and the gaps that occur among the rest1 we shall see further reason for distrusting our deductions4 ,on the one hand1 the repeated discovery of vertebrate remains in strata previously supposed to contain none1--of reptiles where only fish were thought to exist1--of mammals where it was believed there were no creatures higher than reptiles2 renders it daily more manifest how small is the value of negative evidence4 ,on the other hand1 the worthlessness of the assumption that we have discovered the earliest1 or anything like the earliest1 organic remains1 is becoming equally clear4 ,that the oldest known aqueous formations have been greatly changed by igneous action1 and that still older ones have been totally transformed by it1 is becoming undeniable4 ,and the fact that sedimentary strata earlier than any we know1 have been melted up1 being admitted1 it must also be admitted that we cannot say how far back in time this destruction of sedimentary strata has been going on4 ,thus it is manifest that the title ,palozoic1 as applied to the earliest known fossiliferous strata1 involves a petitio principii2 and that1 for aught we know to the contrary1 only the last few chapters of the ,earth's biological history may have come down to us4 ,all inferences drawn from such scattered facts as we find1 must thus be extremely questionable4 ,if1 looking at the general aspect of evidence1 a progressionist argues that the earliest known vertebrate remains are those of ,fishes1 which are the most homogeneous of the vertebrata2 that ,reptiles1 which are more heterogeneous1 are later2 and that later still1 and more heterogeneous still1 are ,mammals and ,birds2 it may be replied that the ,palozoic deposits1 not being estuary deposits1 are not likely to contain the remains of terrestrial vertebrata1 which may nevertheless have existed at that era4 ,the same answer may be made to the argument that the vertebrate fauna of the ,palozoic period1 consisting so far as we know1 entirely of ,fishes1 was less heterogeneous than the modern vertebrate fauna1 which includes ,reptiles1 ,birds and ,mammals1 of multitudinous genera2 or the uniformitarian may contend with great show of truth1 that this appearance of higher and more varied forms in later geologic eras1 was due to progressive immigration--that a continent slowly upheaved from the ocean at a point remote from pre-existing continents1 would necessarily be peopled from them in a succession like that which our strata display4 ,at the same time the counter-arguments may be proved equally inconclusive4 ,when1 to show that there cannot have been a continuous evolution of the more homogeneous organic forms into the more heterogeneous ones1 the uniformitarian points to the breaks that occur in the succession of these forms2 there is the sufficient answer that current geological changes show us why such breaks must occur1 and why1 by subsidences and elevations of large area1 there must be produced such marked breaks as those which divide the three great geologic epochs4 ,or again1 if the opponent of the development hypothesis cites the facts set forth by ,professor ,huxley in his lecture on 8,persistent ,types0--if he points out that 8of some two hundred known orders of plants1 not one is exclusively fossil10 while 8among animals1 there is not a single totally extinct class2 and of the orders1 at the outside not more than seven per cent4 are unrepresented in the existing creation0--if he urges that among these some have continued from the ,silurian epoch to our own day with scarcely any change--and if he infers that there is evidently a much greater average resemblance between the living forms of the past and those of the present1 than consists with this hypothesis2 there is still a satisfactory reply1 on which in fact ,prof4 ,huxley insists2 namely1 that we have evidence of a 8pre-geologic era0 of unknown duration4 ,and indeed1 when it is remembered1 that the enormous subsidences of the ,silurian period show the ,earth's crust to have been approximately as thick then as it is now--when it is concluded that the time taken to form so thick a crust1 must have been immense as compared with the time which has since elapsed--when it is assumed1 as it must be1 that during this comparatively immense time the geologic and biologic changes went on at their usual rates2 it becomes manifest1 not only that the palontological records which we find1 do not negative the theory of evolution1 but that they are such as might rationally be looked for4 ,moreover1 it must not be forgotten that though the evidence suffices neither for proof nor disproof1 yet some of its most conspicuous facts support the belief1 that the more heterogeneous organisms and groups of organisms1 have been evolved from the less heterogeneous ones4 ,the average community of type between the fossils of adjacent strata1 and still more the community that is found between the latest tertiary fossils and creatures now existing1 is one of these facts4 ,the discovery in some modern deposits of such forms as the ,palotherium and ,anaplotherium1 which1 if we may rely on ,prof4 ,owen1 had a type of structure intermediate between some of the types now existing1 is another of these facts4 ,and the comparatively recent appearance of ,man1 is a third fact of this kind1 which possesses still greater significance4 ,hence we may say1 that though our knowledge of past life upon the ,earth1 is too scanty to justify us in asserting an evolution of the simple into the complex1 either in individual forms or in the aggregate of forms2 yet the knowledge we have1 not only consists with the belief that there has been such an evolution1 but rather supports it than otherwise4 99 99 99 99 99 #dg4 ,whether an advance from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous is or is not displayed in the biological history of the globe1 it is clearly enough displayed in the progress of the latest and most heterogeneous creature--,man4 ,it is alike true that1 during the period in which the ,earth has been peopled1 the human organism has grown more heterogeneous among the civilized divisions of the species2 and that the species1 as a whole1 has been made more heterogeneous by the multiplication of races and the differentiation of these races from each other4 ,in proof of the first of these positions1 we may cite the fact that1 in the relative development of the limbs1 the civilized man departs more widely from the general type of the placental mammalia1 than do the lower human races4 ,though often possessing well-developed body and arms1 the ,papuan has extremely small legs3 thus reminding us of the quadrumana1 in which there is no great contrast in size between the hind and fore limbs4 ,but in the ,european1 the greater length and massiveness of the legs has become very marked--the fore and hind limbs are relatively more heterogeneous4 ,again1 the greater ratio which the cranial bones bear to the facial bones1 illustrates the same truth4 ,among the vertebrata in general1 evolution is marked by an increasing heterogeneity in the vertebral column1 and more especially in the segments constituting the skull3 the higher forms being distinguished by the relatively larger size of the bones which cover the brain1 and the relatively smaller size of those which form the jaws1 c4 ,now1 this characteristic1 which is stronger in ,man than in any other creature1 is stronger in the ,european than in the savage4 ,moreover1 judging from the greater extent and variety of faculty he exhibits1 we may infer that the civilized man has also a more complex or heterogeneous nervous system than the uncivilized man2 and indeed the fact is in part visible in the increased ratio which his cerebrum bears to the subjacent ganglia4 ,if further elucidation be needed1 we may find it in every nursery4 ,the infant ,european has sundry marked points of resemblance to the lower human races2 as in the flatness of the al of the nose1 the depression of its bridge1 the divergence and forward opening of the nostrils1 the form of the lips1 the absence of a frontal sinus1 the width between the eyes1 the smallness of the legs4 ,now1 as the developmental process by which these traits are turned into those of the adult ,european1 is a continuation of that change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous displayed during the previous evolution of the embryo1 which every physiologist will admit2 it follows that the parallel developmental process by which the like traits of the barbarous races have been turned into those of the civilized races1 has also been a continuation of the change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous4 ,the truth of the second position--that ,mankind1 as a whole1 have become more heterogeneous--is so obvious as scarcely to need illustration4 ,every work on ,ethnology1 by its divisions and subdivisions of races1 bears testimony to it4 ,even were we to admit the hypothesis that ,mankind originated from several separate stocks1 it would still remain true that as1 from each of these stocks1 there have sprung many now widely different tribes1 which are proved by philological evidence to have had a common origin1 the race as a whole is far less homogeneous than it once was4 ,add to which1 that we have1 in the ,anglo-,americans1 an example of a new variety arising within these few generations2 and that1 if we may trust to the descriptions of observers1 we are likely soon to have another such example in ,australia4 99 99 99 99 99 #dh4 ,on passing from ,humanity under its individual form1 to ,humanity as socially embodied1 we find the general law still more variously exemplified4 ,the change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous1 is displayed equally in the progress of civilization as a whole1 and in the progress of every tribe or nation2 and is still going on with increasing rapidity4 ,as we see in existing barbarous tribes1 society in its first and lowest form is a homogeneous aggregation of individuals having like powers and like functions3 the only marked difference of function being that which accompanies difference of sex4 ,every man is warrior1 hunter1 fisherman1 tool-maker1 builder2 every woman performs the same drudgeries2 every family is self-sufficing1 and1 save for purposes of aggression and defence1 might as well live apart from the rest4 ,very early1 however1 in the process of social evolution1 we find an incipient differentiation between the governing and the governed4 ,some kind of chieftainship seems coeval with the first advance from the state of separate wandering families to that of a nomadic tribe4 ,the authority of the strongest makes itself felt among a body of savages1 as in a herd of animals1 or a posse of school-boys4 ,at first1 however1 it is indefinite1 uncertain2 is shared by others of scarcely inferior power2 and is unaccompanied by any difference in occupation or style of living3 the first ruler kills his own game1 makes his own weapons1 builds his own hut1 and1 economically considered1 does not differ from others of his tribe4 ,gradually1 as the tribe progresses1 the contrast between the governing and the governed grows more decided4 ,supreme power becomes hereditary in one family2 the head of that family1 ceasing to provide for his own wants1 is served by others2 and he begins to assume the sole office of ruling4 ,at the same time there has been arising a co-ordinate species of government--that of ,religion4 ,as all ancient records and traditions prove1 the earliest rulers are regarded as divine personages4 ,the maxims and commands they uttered during their lives are held sacred after their deaths1 and are enforced by their divinely-descended successors2 who in their turns are promoted to the pantheon of the race1 there to be worshipped and propitiated along with their predecessors3 the most ancient of whom is the supreme god1 and the rest subordinate gods4 ,for a long time these connate forms of government--civil and religious--continue closely associated4 ,for many generations the king continues to be the chief priest1 and the priesthood to be members of the royal race4 ,for many ages religious law continues to contain more or less of civil regulation1 and civil law to possess more or less of religious sanction2 and even among the most advanced nations these two controlling agencies are by no means completely differentiated from each other4 ,having a common root with these1 and gradually diverging from them1 we find yet another controlling agency--that of ,manners or ceremonial usages4 ,all titles of honour are originally the names of the god-king2 afterwards of ,god and the king2 still later of persons of high rank2 and finally come1 some of them1 to be used between man and man4 ,all forms of complimentary address were at first the expressions of submission from prisoners to their conqueror1 or from subjects to their ruler1 either human or divine--expressions that were afterwards used to propitiate subordinate authorities1 and slowly descended into ordinary intercourse4 ,all modes of salutation were once obeisances made before the monarch and used in worship of him after his death4 ,presently others of the god-descended race were similarly saluted2 and by degrees some of the salutations have become the due of all4#i ,thus1 no sooner does the originally homogeneous social mass differentiate into the governed and the governing parts1 than this last exhibits an incipient differentiation into religious and secular--,church and ,state2 while at the same time there begins to be differentiated from both1 that less definite species of government which rides our daily intercourse--a species of government which1 as we may see in heralds' colleges1 in books of the peerage1 in masters of ceremonies1 is not without a certain embodiment of its own4 ,each of these kinds of government is itself subject to successive differentiations4 ,in the course of ages1 there arises1 as among ourselves1 a highly complex political organization of monarch1 ministers1 lords and commons1 with their subordinate administrative departments1 courts of justice1 revenue offices1 c41 supplemented in the provinces by municipal governments1 county governments1 parish or union governments--all of them more or less elaborated4 ,by its side there grows up a highly complex religious organization1 with its various grades of officials from archbishops down to sextons1 its colleges1 convocations1 ecclesiastical courts1 c42 to all which must be added the ever-multiplying independent sects1 each with its general and local authorities4 ,and at the same time there is developed a highly complex aggregation of customs1 manners1 and temporary fashions1 enforced by society at large1 and serving to control those minor transactions between man and man which are not regulated by civil and religious law4 ,moreover1 it is to be observed that this ever-increasing heterogeneity in the governmental appliances of each nation1 has been accompanied by an increasing heterogeneity in the governmental appliances of different nations3 all of which are more or less unlike in their political systems and legislation1 in their creeds and religious institutions1 in their customs and ceremonial usages4 ,simultaneously there has been going on a second differentiation of a more familiar kind2 that1 namely1 by which the mass of the community has been segregated into distinct classes and orders of workers4 ,while the governing part has undergone the complex development above detailed1 the governed part has undergone an equally complex development2 which has resulted in that minute division of labour characterizing advanced nations4 ,it is needless to trace out this progress from its first stages1 up through the caste divisions of the ,east and the incorporated guilds of ,europe1 to the elaborate producing and distributing organization existing among ourselves4 ,political economists have long since indicated the evolution which1 beginning with a tribe whose members severally perform the same actions1 each for himself ends with a civilized community whose members severally perform different actions for each other2 and they have further pointed out the changes through which the solitary producer of any one commodity1 is transformed into a combination of producers who1 united under a master1 take separate parts in the manufacture of such commodity4 ,but there are yet other and higher phases of this advance from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous in the industrial organization of society4 ,long after considerable progress has been made in the division of labour among the different classes of workers1 there is still little or no division of labour among the widely separated parts of the community3 the nation continues comparatively homogeneous in the respect that in each district the same occupations are pursued4 ,but when roads and other means of transit become numerous and good1 the different districts begin to assume different functions1 and to become mutually dependent4 ,the calico-manufacture locates itself in this county1 the woollen-manufacture in that2 silks are produced here1 lace there2 stockings in one place1 shoes in another2 pottery1 hardware1 cutlery1 come to have their special towns2 and ultimately every locality grows more or less distinguished from the rest by the leading occupation carried on in it4 ,nay1 more1 this subdivision of functions shows itself not only among the different parts of the same nation1 but among different nations4 ,that exchange of commodities which free-trade promises so greatly to increase1 will ultimately have the effect of specializing1 in a greater or less degree1 the industry of each people4 ,so that beginning with a barbarous tribe1 almost if not quite homogeneous in the functions of its members1 the progress has been1 and still is1 towards an economic aggregation of the whole human race2 growing ever more heterogeneous in respect of the separate functions assumed by separate nations1 the separate functions assumed by the local sections of each nation1 the separate functions assumed by the many kinds of makers and traders in each town1 and the separate functions assumed by the workers united in producing each commodity4 99 99 99 99 99 #di4 ,not only is the law thus clearly exemplified in the evolution of the social organism1 but it is exemplified with equal clearness in the evolution of all products of human thought and action2 whether concrete or abstract1 real or ideal4 ,let us take ,language as our first illustration4 ,the lowest form of language is the exclamation1 by which an entire idea is vaguely conveyed through a single sound2 as among the lower animals4 ,that human language ever consisted solely of exclamations1 and so was strictly homogeneous in respect of its parts of speech1 we have no evidence4 ,but that language can be traced down to a form in which nouns and verbs are its only elements1 is an established fact4 ,in the gradual multiplication of parts of speech out of these primary ones--in the differentiation of verbs into active and passive1 of nouns into abstract and concrete--in the rise of distinctions of mood1 tense1 person1 of number and case--in the formation of auxiliary verbs1 of adjectives1 adverbs1 pronouns1 prepositions1 articles--in the divergence of those orders1 genera1 species1 and varieties of parts of speech by which civilized races express minute modifications of meaning--we see a change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous4 ,and it may be remarked1 in passing1 that it is more especially in virtue of having carried this subdivision of functions to a greater extent and completeness1 that the ,english language is superior to all others4 ,another aspect under which we may trace the development of language1 is the differentiation of words of allied meanings4 ,philology early disclosed the truth that in all languages words may be grouped into families having a common ancestry4 ,an aboriginal name1 applied indiscriminately to each of an extensive and ill-defined class of things or actions1 presently undergoes modifications by which the chief divisions of the class are expressed4 ,these several names springing from the primitive root1 themselves become the parents of other names still further modified4 ,and by the aid of those systematic modes which presently arise1 of making derivatives and forming compound terms expressing still smaller distinctions1 there is finally developed a tribe of words so heterogeneous in sound and meaning1 that to the uninitiated it seems incredible they should have had a common origin4 ,meanwhile1 from other roots there are being evolved other such tribes1 until there results a language of some sixty thousand or more unlike words1 signifying as many unlike objects1 qualities1 acts4 ,yet another way in which language in general advances from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous1 is in the multiplication of languages4 ,whether1 as ,max ,mller and ,bunsen think1 all languages have grown from one stock1 or whether1 as some philologists say1 they have grown from two or more stocks1 it is clear that since large families of languages1 as the ,indo-,european1 are of one parentage1 they have become distinct through a process of continuous divergence4 ,the same diffusion over the ,earth's surface which has led to the differentiation of the race1 has simultaneously led to a differentiation of their speech3 a truth which we see further illustrated in each nation by the peculiarities of dialect found in separate districts4 ,thus the progress of ,language conforms to the general law1 alike in the evolution of languages1 in the evolution of families of words1 and in the evolution of parts of speech4 ,on passing from spoken to written language1 we come upon several classes of facts1 all having similar implications4 ,written language is connate with ,painting and ,sculpture2 and at first all three are appendages of ,architecture1 and have a direct connexion with the primary form of all ,government--the theocratic4 ,merely noting by the way the fact that sundry wild races1 as for example the ,australians and the tribes of ,south ,africa1 are given to depicting personages and events upon the walls of caves1 which are probably regarded as sacred places1 let us pass to the case of the ,egyptians4 ,among them1 as also among the ,assyrians1 we find mural paintings used to decorate the temple of the god and the palace of the king 7which were1 indeed1 originally identical72 and as such they were governmental appliances in the same sense that state-pageants and religious feasts were4 ,further1 they were governmental appliances in virtue of representing the worship of the god1 the triumphs of the god-king1 the submission of his subjects1 and the punishment of the rebellious4 ,and yet again they were governmental1 as being the products of an art reverenced by the people as a sacred mystery4 ,from the habitual use of this pictorial representation1 there naturally grew up the but slightly-modified practice of picture-writing--a practice which was found still extant among the ,mexicans at the time they were discovered4 ,by abbreviations analogous to those still going on in our own written and spoken language1 the most familiar of these pictured figures were successively simplified2 and ultimately there grew up a system of symbols1 most of which had but a distant resemblance to the things for which they stood4 ,the inference that the hieroglyphics of the ,egyptians were thus produced1 is confirmed by the fact that the picture-writing of the ,mexicans was found to have given birth to a like family of ideographic forms2 and among them1 as among the ,egyptians1 these had been partially differentiated into the kuriological or imitative1 and the tropical or symbolic3 which were1 however1 used together in the same record4 ,in ,egypt1 written language underwent a further differentiation2 whence resulted the hieratic and the epistolographic or enchorial3 both of which are derived from the original hieroglyphic4 ,at the same time we find that for the expression of proper names1 which could not be otherwise conveyed1 phonetic symbols were employed2 and though it is alleged that the ,egyptians never actually achieved complete alphabetic writing1 yet it can scarcely be doubted that these phonetic symbols occasionally used in aid of their ideographic ones1 were the germs out of which alphabetic writing grew4 ,once having become separate from hieroglyphics1 alphabetic writing itself underwent numerous differentiations--multiplied alphabets were produced3 between most of which1 however1 more or less connexion can still be traced4 ,and in each civilized nation there has now grown up1 for the representation of one set of sounds1 several sets of written signs1 used for distinct purposes4 ,finally1 through a yet more important differentiation came printing2 which1 uniform in kind as it was at first1 has since become multiform4 99 99 99 99 99 #ej4 ,while written language was passing through its earlier stages of development1 the mural decoration which formed its root was being differentiated into ,painting and ,sculpture4 ,the gods1 kings1 men1 and animals represented1 were originally marked by indented outlines and coloured4 ,in most cases these outlines were of such depth1 and the object they circumscribed so far rounded and marked out in its leading parts1 as to form a species of work intermediate between intaglio and bas-relief4 ,in other cases we see an advance upon this3 the raised spaces between the figures being chiselled off1 and the figures themselves appropriately tinted1 a painted bas-relief was produced4 ,the restored ,assyrian architecture at ,sydenham1 exhibits this style of art carried to greater perfection--the persons and things represented1 though still barbarously coloured1 are carved out with more truth and in greater detail2 and in the winged lions and bulls used for the angles of gateways1 we may see a considerable advance towards a completely sculptured figure2 which1 nevertheless1 is still coloured1 and still forms part of the building4 ,but while in ,assyria the production of a statue proper1 seems to have been little1 if at all1 attempted1 we may trace in ,egyptian art the gradual separation of the sculptured figure from the wall4 ,a walk through the collection in the ,british ,museum will clearly show this2 while it will at the same time afford an opportunity of observing the evident traces which the independent statues bear of their derivation from bas-relief3 seeing that nearly all of them not only display that union of the limbs with the body which is the characteristic of bas-relief1 but have the back of the statue united from head to foot with a block which stands in place of the original wall4 ,greece repeated the leading stages of this progress4 ,as in ,egypt and ,assyria1 these twin arts were at first united with each other and with their parent1 ,architecture2 and were the aids of ,religion and ,government4 ,on the friezes of ,greek temples1 we see coloured bas-reliefs representing sacrifices1 battles1 processions1 games--all in some sort religious4 ,on the pediments we see painted sculptures more or less united with the tympanum1 and having for subjects the triumphs of gods or heroes4 ,even when we come to statues that are definitely separated from the buildings to which they pertain1 we still find them coloured2 and only in the later periods of ,greek civilization1 does the differentiation of sculpture from painting appear to have become complete4 ,in ,christian art we may clearly trace a parallel re-genesis4 ,all early paintings and sculptures throughout ,europe1 were religious in subject--represented ,christs1 crucifixions1 virgins1 holy families1 apostles1 saints4 ,they formed integral parts of church architecture1 and were among the means of exciting worship3 as in ,roman ,catholic countries they still are4 ,moreover1 the early sculptures of ,christ on the cross1 of virgins1 of saints1 were coloured2 and it needs but to call to mind the painted madonnas and crucifixes still abundant in continental churches and highways1 to perceive the significant fact that painting and sculpture continue in closest connexion with each other1 where they continue in closest connexion with their parent4 ,even when ,christian sculpture was pretty clearly differentiated from painting1 it was still religious and governmental in its subjects--was used for tombs in churches and statues of kings2 while1 at the same time1 painting1 where not purely ecclesiastical1 was applied to the decoration of palaces1 and besides representing royal personages1 was almost wholly devoted to sacred legends4 ,only in quite recent times have painting and sculpture become entirely secular arts4 ,only within these few centuries has painting been divided into historical1 landscape1 marine1 architectural1 genre1 animal1 still-life1 c41 and sculpture grown heterogeneous in respect of the variety of real and ideal subjects with which it occupies itself4 ,strange as it seems then1 we find it no less true1 that all forms of written language1 of painting1 and of sculpture1 have a common root in the politico-religious decorations of ancient temples and palaces4 ,little resemblance as they now have1 the bust that stands on the console1 the landscape that hangs against the wall1 and the copy of the ,times lying upon the table1 are remotely akin2 not only in nature1 but by extraction4 ,the brazen face of the knocker which the postman has just lifted1 is related not only to the woodcuts of the ,illustrated ,london ,news which he is delivering1 but to the characters of the billet-doux which accompanies it4 ,between the painted window1 the prayer-book on which its light falls1 and the adjacent monument1 there is consanguinity4 ,the effigies on our coins1 the signs over shops1 the figures that fill every ledger1 the coat of arms outside the carriage-panel1 and the placards inside the omnibus1 are1 in common with dolls1 blue-books and paper-hangings1 lineally descended from the rude sculpture-paintings in which the ,egyptians represented the triumphs and worship of their god-kings4 ,perhaps no example can be given which more vividly illustrates the multiplicity and heterogeneity of the products that in course of time may arise by successive differentiations from a common stock4 ,before passing to other classes of facts1 it should be observed that the evolution of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous is displayed not only in the separation of ,painting and ,sculpture from ,architecture and from each other1 and in the greater variety of subjects they embody2 but it is further shown in the structure of each work4 ,a modern picture or statue is of far more heterogeneous nature than an ancient one4 ,an ,egyptian sculpture-fresco represents all its figures as on one plane--that is1 at the same distance from the eye2 and so is less heterogeneous than a painting that represents them as at various distances from the eye4 ,it exhibits all objects as exposed to the same degree of light2 and so is less heterogeneous than a painting which exhibits different objects1 and different parts of each object1 as in different degrees of light4 ,it uses scarcely any but the primary colours1 and these in their full intensity2 and so is less heterogeneous than a painting which1 introducing the primary colours but sparingly1 employs an endless variety of intermediate tints1 each of heterogeneous composition1 and differing from the rest not only in quality but in intensity4 ,moreover1 we see in these earliest works a great uniformity of conception4 ,the same arrangement of figures is perpetually reproduced--the same actions1 attitudes1 faces1 dresses4 ,in ,egypt the modes of representation were so fixed that it was sacrilege to introduce a novelty2 and indeed it could have been only in consequence of a fixed mode of representation that a system of hieroglyphics became possible4 ,the ,assyrian bas-reliefs display parallel characters4 ,deities1 kings1 attendants1 winged-figures and animals1 are severally depicted in like positions1 holding like implements1 doing like things1 and with like expression or non-expression of face4 ,if a palm-grove is introduced1 all the trees are of the same height1 have the same number of leaves1 and are equidistant4 ,when water is imitated1 each wave is a counterpart of the rest2 and the fish1 almost always of one kind1 are evenly distributed over the surface4 ,the beards of the kings1 the gods1 and the winged-figures1 are everywhere similar2 as are the manes of the lions1 and equally so those of the horses4 ,hair is represented throughout by one form of curl4 ,the king's beard is quite architecturally built up of compound tiers of uniform curls1 alternating with twisted tiers placed in a transverse direction1 and arranged with perfect regularity2 and the terminal tufts of the bulls' tails are represented in exactly the same manner4 ,without tracing out analogous facts in early ,christian art1 in which1 though less striking1 they are still visible1 the advance in heterogeneity will be sufficiently manifest on remembering that in the pictures of our own day the composition is endlessly varied2 the attitudes1 faces1 expressions1 unlike2 the subordinate objects different in size1 form1 position1 texture2 and more or less of contrast even in the smallest details4 ,or1 if we compare an ,egyptian statue1 seated bolt upright on a block1 with hands on knees1 fingers outspread and parallel1 eyes looking straight forward1 and the two sides perfectly symmetrical in every particular1 with a statue of the advanced ,greek or the modern school1 which is asymmetrical in respect of the position of the head1 the body1 the limbs1 the arrangement of the hair1 dress1 appendages1 and in its relations to neighbouring objects1 we shall see the change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous clearly manifested4 99 99 99 99 99 #ea4 ,in the co-ordinate origin and gradual differentiation of ,poetry1 ,music1 and ,dancing1 we have another series of illustrations4 ,rhythm in speech1 rhythm in sound1 and rhythm in motion1 were in the beginning1 parts of the same thing2 and have only in process of time become separate things4 ,among various existing barbarous tribes we find them still united4 ,the dances of savages are accompanied by some kind of monotonous chant1 the clapping of hands1 the striking of rude instruments3 there are measured movements1 measured words1 and measured tones2 and the whole ceremony1 usually having reference to war or sacrifice1 is of governmental character4 ,in the early records of the historic races we similarly find these three forms of metrical action united in religious festivals4 ,in the ,hebrew writings we read that the triumphal ode composed by ,moses on the defeat of the ,egyptians1 was sung to an accompaniment of dancing and timbrels4 ,the ,israelites danced and sung 8at the inauguration of the golden calf4 ,and as it is generally agreed that this representation of the ,deity was borrowed from the mysteries of ,apis1 it is probable that the dancing was copied from that of the ,egyptians on those occasions40 ,there was an annual dance in ,shiloh on the sacred festival2 and ,david danced before the ark4 ,again1 in ,greece the like relation is everywhere seen3 the original type being there1 as probably in other cases1 a simultaneous chanting and mimetic representation of the life and adventures of the god4 ,the ,spartan dances were accompanied by hymns and songs2 and in general the ,greeks had 8no festivals or religious assemblies but what were accompanied with songs and dances0--both of them being forms of worship used before altars4 ,among the ,romans1 too1 there were sacred dances3 the ,salian and ,lupercalian being named as of that kind4 ,and even in ,christian countries1 as at ,limoges in comparatively recent times1 the people have danced in the choir in honour of a saint4 ,the incipient separation of these once united arts from each other and from religion1 was early visible in ,greece4 ,probably diverging from dances partly religious1 partly warlike1 as the ,corybantian1 came the war-dances proper1 of which there were various kinds2 and from these resulted secular dances4 ,meanwhile ,music and ,poetry1 though still united1 came to have an existence separate from dancing4 ,the aboriginal ,greek poems1 religious in subject1 were not recited but chanted2 and though at first the chant of the poet was accompanied by the dance of the chorus1 it ultimately grew into independence4 ,later still1 when the poem had been differentiated into epic and lyric--when it became the custom to sing the lyric and recite the epic--poetry proper was born4 ,as during the same period musical instruments were being multiplied1 we may presume that music came to have an existence apart from words4 ,and both of them were beginning to assume other forms besides the religious4 ,facts having like implications might be cited from the histories of later times and peoples2 as the practices of our own early minstrels1 who sang to the harp heroic narratives versified by themselves to music of their own composition3 thus uniting the now separate offices of poet1 composer1 vocalist1 and instrumentalist4 ,but1 without further illustration1 the common origin and gradual differentiation of ,dancing1 ,poetry1 and ,music will be sufficiently manifest4 ,the advance from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous is displayed not only in the separation of these arts from each other and from religion1 but also in the multiplied differentiations which each of them afterwards undergoes4 ,not to dwell upon the numberless kinds of dancing that have1 in course of time1 come into use2 and not to occupy space in detailing the progress of poetry1 as seen in the development of the various forms of metre1 of rhyme1 and of general organization2 let us confine our attention to music as a type of the group4 ,as argued by ,dr4 ,burney1 and as implied by the customs of still extant barbarous races1 the first musical instruments were1 without doubt1 percussive--sticks1 calabashes1 tom-toms--and were used simply to mark the time of the dance2 and in this constant repetition of the same sound1 we see music in its most homogeneous form4 ,the ,egyptians had a lyre with three strings4 ,the early lyre of the ,greeks had four1 constituting their tetrachord4 ,in course of some centuries lyres of seven and eight strings were employed4 ,and1 by the expiration of a thousand years1 they had advanced to their 8great system0 of the double octave4 ,through all which changes there of course arose a greater heterogeneity of melody4 ,simultaneously there came into use the different modes--,dorian1 ,ionian1 ,phrygian1 olian1 and ,lydian--answering to our keys3 and of these there were ultimately fifteen4 ,as yet1 however1 there was but little heterogeneity in the time of their music4 ,instrumental music during this period being merely the accompaniment of vocal music1 and vocal music being completely subordinated to words1--the singer being also the poet1 chanting his own compositions and making the lengths of his notes agree with the feet of his verses2 there unavoidably arose a tiresome uniformity of measure1 which1 as ,dr ,burney says1 8no resources of melody could disguise40 ,lacking the complex rhythm obtained by our equal bars and unequal notes1 the only rhythm was that produced by the quantity of the syllables1 and was of necessity comparatively monotonous4 ,and further1 it may be observed that the chant thus resulting1 being like recitative1 was much less clearly differentiated from ordinary speech than is our modern song4 ,nevertheless1 considering the extended range of notes in use1 the variety of modes1 the occasional variations of time consequent on changes of metre1 and the multiplication of instruments1 we see that music had1 towards the close of ,greek civilization1 attained to considerable heterogeneity3 not indeed as compared with our music1 but as compared with that which preceded it4 ,as yet1 however1 there existed nothing but melody3 harmony was unknown4 ,it was not until ,christian church-music had reached some development1 that music in parts was evolved2 and then it came into existence through a very unobtrusive differentiation4 ,difficult as it may be to conceive1 priori1 how the advance from melody to harmony could take place without a sudden leap1 it is none the less true that it did so4 ,the circumstance which prepared the way for it1 was the employment of two choirs singing alternately the same air4 ,afterwards it became the practice 7very possibly first suggested by a mistake7 for the second choir to commence before the first had ceased2 thus producing a fugue4 ,with the simple airs then in use1 a partially harmonious fugue might not improbably thus result2 and a very partially harmonious fugue satisfied the ears of that age1 as we know from still preserved examples4 ,the idea having once been given1 the composing of airs productive of fugal harmony would naturally grow up2 as in some way it did grow up out of this alternate choir-singing4 ,and from the fugue to concerted music of two1 three1 four1 and more parts1 the transition was easy4 ,without pointing out in detail the increasing complexity that resulted from introducing notes of various lengths1 from the multiplication of keys1 from the use of accidentals1 from varieties of time1 from modulations and so forth1 it needs but to contrast music as it is1 with music as it was1 to see how immense is the increase of heterogeneity4 ,we see this if1 looking at music in its ensemble1 we enumerate its many different genera and species--if we consider the divisions into vocal1 instrumental1 and mixed2 and their subdivisions into music for different voices and different instruments--if we observe the many forms of sacred music1 from the simple hymn1 the chant1 the canon1 motet1 anthem1 c41 up to the oratorio2 and the still more numerous forms of secular music1 from the ballad up to the serenata1 from the instrumental solo up to the symphony4 ,again1 the same truth is seen on comparing any one sample of aboriginal music with a sample of modern music--even an ordinary song for the piano2 which we find to be relatively highly heterogeneous1 not only in respect of the varieties in the pitch and in the length of the notes1 the number of different notes sounding at the same instant in company with the voice1 and the variations of strength with which they are sounded and sung1 but in respect of the changes of key1 the changes of time1 the changes of timbre of the voice1 and the many other modifications of expression4 ,while between the old monotonous dance-chant and a grand opera of our own day1 with its endless orchestral complexities and vocal combinations1 the contrast in heterogeneity is so extreme that it seems scarcely credible that the one should have been the ancestor of the other4 99 99 99 99 99 #eb4 ,were they needed1 many further illustrations might be cited4 ,going back to the early time when the deeds of the god-king1 chanted and mimetically represented in dances round his altar1 were further narrated in picture-writings on the walls of temples and palaces1 and so constituted a rude literature1 we might trace the development of ,literature through phases in which1 as in the ,hebrew ,scriptures it presents in one work1 theology1 cosmogony1 history1 biography1 civil law1 ethics1 poetry2 through other phases in which1 as in the ,iliad1 the religious1 martial1 historical1 the epic1 dramatic1 and lyric elements are similarly commingled2 down to its present heterogeneous development1 in which its divisions and subdivisions are so numerous and varied as to defy complete classification4 ,or we might track the evolution of ,science3 beginning with the era in which it was not yet differentiated from ,art1 and was1 in union with ,art1 the handmaid of ,religion2 passing through the era in which the sciences were so few and rudimentary1 as to be simultaneously cultivated by the same philosophers2 and ending with the era in which the genera and species are so numerous that few can enumerate them1 and no one can adequately grasp even one genus4 ,or we might do the like with ,architecture1 with the ,drama1 with ,dress4 ,but doubtless the reader is already weary of illustrations2 and my promise has been amply fulfilled4 ,i believe it has been shown beyond question1 that that which the ,german physiologists have found to be the law of organic development1 is the law of all development4 ,the advance from the simple to the complex1 through a process of successive differentiations1 is seen alike in the earliest changes of the ,universe to which we can reason our way back1 and in the earliest changes which we can inductively establish2 it is seen in the geologic and climatic evolution of the ,earth1 and of every single organism on its surface2 it is seen in the evolution of ,humanity1 whether contemplated in the civilized individual1 or in the aggregation of races2 it is seen in the evolution of ,society1 in respect alike of its political1 its religious1 and its economical organization2 and it is seen in the evolution of all those endless concrete and abstract products of human activity1 which constitute the environment of our daily life4 ,from the remotest past which ,science can fathom1 up to the novelties of yesterday1 that in which ,evolution essentially consists1 is the transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous4 ----- ,footnote #h3 ,the substance of this chapter is nearly identical with the first half of an essay on 8,progress3 its ,law and ,cause10 which was originally published in the ,westminster ,review for ,april #aheg3 only a few unimportant additions and alterations have been made4 ,the succeeding chapter1 however1 in which the subject is continued1 is1 with the exception of a fragment embodied in it1 wholly new4 ,footnote #i3 ,for detailed proof of these assertions see essay on ,manners and ,fashion4 ,,chapter ,,iii4 ,,the ,,law ,,of ,,evolution1 ,,continued4 #ec4 ,but now1 does this generalization express the whole truth8 ,does it include all the phenomena of ,evolution8 and does it exclude all other phenomena8 ,a careful consideration of the facts1 will show that it does neither4 ,that there are changes from the less heterogeneous to the more heterogeneous1 which do not come within what we call ,evolution1 is proved in every case of local disease4 ,a portion of the body in which there arises a cancer1 or other morbid growth1 unquestionably displays a new differentiation4 ,whether this morbid growth be1 or be not1 more heterogeneous than the tissues in which it is seated1 is not the question4 ,the question is1 whether the structure of the organism as a whole1 is1 or is not1 rendered more heterogeneous by the addition of a part unlike every pre-existing part1 both in form and composition4 ,and to this question there can be none but an affirmative answer4 ,again1 it might with apparent truth be contended1 that the earlier stages of decomposition in a dead body1 similarly involve an increase of heterogeneity4 ,supposing the chemical changes to commence in some parts of the body earlier than in other parts1 as they commonly do2 and to affect different tissues in different1 ways1 as they must2 it seems to be a necessary admission that the entire body1 made up of undecomposed parts and parts decomposed in different ways and degrees1 has become more heterogeneous than it was4 ,though greater homogeneity will be the eventual result1 the immediate result is the opposite4 ,and yet this immediate result is certainly not evolution4 ,but perhaps of all illustrations the least debatable are those furnished by social disorders and disasters4 ,when in any nation there occurs a rebellion1 which1 while leaving some provinces undisturbed1 developes itself here in secret societies1 there in public demonstrations1 and elsewhere in actual appeal to arms1 leading probably to conflict and bloodshed2 it must be admitted that the society1 regarded as a whole1 has so been rendered more heterogeneous4 ,or when a dearth causes commercial panic with its entailed bankruptcies1 closed factories1 discharged operatives1 political agitations1 food riots1 incendiarisms2 it is manifest that as1 throughout the rest of society1 there still exists the ordinary organization displaying the usual phenomena1 these new phenomena must be regarded as adding to the complexity previously existing4 ,nevertheless1 it is clear that such changes so far from constituting a further stage of evolution1 are steps towards dissolution4 ,there is good reason to think then1 that the definition arrived at in the last chapter1 is an imperfect one4 ,we may suspect1 not that the process of evolution is different from the process there described2 but that the description did not contain all that it should4 ,the changes above instanced as coming within the formula as it now stands1 are so obviously different from the rest1 that the inclusion of them implies some oversight--some distinction hitherto overlooked4 ,such further distinction we shall find really exists4 99 99 99 99 99 #ed4 ,at the same time that all evolution is a change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous1 it is also a change from the indefinite to the definite4 ,as well as an advance from simplicity to complexity1 there is an advance from confusion to order--from undetermined arrangement to determined arrangement4 ,in the process of development1 no matter what sphere it is displayed in1 there is not only a gradual multiplication of unlike parts2 but there is a gradual increase in the distinctness with which these parts are marked off from each other4 ,and so is that increase of heterogeneity which characterizes ,evolution1 distinguished from that increase of heterogeneity which does not4 ,for proof of this1 it needs only to reconsider the instances given above4 ,the structural changes constituting a disease1 have no such definiteness1 either in locality1 extent1 or outline1 as the structural changes constituting development4 ,though certain morbid growths arise much more commonly in some parts of the body than in others 7as warts on the hands1 cancer on the breasts1 tubercle in the lungs71 yet they are not confined to these parts2 nor1 when found on them1 are they anything like so precise in their relative positions as are the normal parts around them4 ,in size1 again1 they are extremely variable--they bear no such constant proportion to the body as organs do4 ,their forms1 too1 are far less specific than organic forms4 ,and they are extremely irregular or confused in their internal structures4 ,that is to say1 they are in all respects comparatively indefinite4 ,the like peculiarity may be traced in decomposition4 ,that state of total indefiniteness to which a dead body is finally reduced1 is a state towards which the putrefactive changes have tended from their commencement4 ,each step in the destruction of the organic compounds1 is accompanied by a blurring of the minute structure--diminishes its distinctness4 ,from the portions that have undergone most decomposition1 there is a gradual transition to the less decomposed portions4 ,and step by step the lines of organization1 once so precise1 disappear4 ,similarly with social changes of an abnormal kind4 ,a political outbreak rising finally to a rebellion1 tends from the very first to obliterate the specializations1 governmental and industrial1 which previously existed4 ,the disaffection which originates such an outbreak1 itself implies a loosening of those ties by which the citizens are bound up into distinct classes and sub-classes4 ,agitation1 growing into revolutionary meetings1 shows us a decided tendency towards the fusion of ranks that are usually separated4 ,acts of open insubordination exhibit a breaking through of those definite limits to individual conduct which were previously observed2 and a disappearance of the lines previously existing between those in authority and those beneath them4 ,at the same time1 by the arrest of trade1 artizans and others lose their occupations2 and in so ceasing to be functionally distinguished1 become fused into a mass from which the demarcations in great part vanish4 ,and when at last there comes positive insurrection1 all magisterial and official powers1 all class distinctions1 and all industrial differences1 at once cease3 organized society lapses into an unorganized aggregation of social units4 ,how the like holds true of such social disasters as are entailed by famine1 needs not be pointed out4 ,on calling to mind that in cases of this kind the changes are from order towards disorder1 it will at once be seen that like the foregoing they are changes from definite arrangements to indefinite arrangements4 ,thus then is that increase of heterogeneity which constitutes ,evolution1 distinguished from that increase of heterogeneity which does not do so4 ,though in disease and death1 individual or social1 the earliest modifications may be construed as additions to the heterogeneity previously existing2 yet they cannot be construed as additions to the definiteness previously existing4 ,they begin from the very outset to destroy this definiteness2 and so1 gradually produce a heterogeneity that is indeterminate instead of determinate4 ,just in the same way that a city1 already multiform in its variously arranged structures of various architecture1 may be made more multiform by an earthquake1 which leaves part of it standing and overthrows other parts in different ways and degrees1 and yet is at the same time reduced from definite arrangement to indefinite arrangement2 so may organized bodies be made for a time more multiform by changes which are nevertheless disorganizing changes4 ,and in the one case as in the other1 it is the absence of definiteness which distinguishes the multiformity of regression from the multiformity of progression4 ,if the advance from the indefinite to the definite is an essential characteristic of ,evolution1 we shall of course find it everywhere displayed2 as in the last ,chapter we found the advance from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous4 ,with a view of showing that it is so1 let us now briefly reconsider the same several classes of facts4 99 99 99 99 99 #ee4 ,beginning as before with a hypothetical illustration1 we have to note that each further stage in the evolution of the ,solar ,system1 supposing it to have originated from diffused matter1 was an advance towards more definite forms1 and times1 and forces4 ,at first irregular in shape and with indistinct margins1 the attenuated substance1 as it concentrated and acquired a rotatory motion1 must have assumed the shape of an oblate spheroid2 which1 with every increase of density1 became more specific in general outline1 and had its surface more sharply marked off from the surrounding void4 ,at the same time1 the constituent portions of nebulous matter1 instead of independently moving towards their common centre of gravity from all points1 and tending to revolve round it in various planes1 as they would at first do1 must have had these planes more and more merged into a single plane2 and this plane must have gained greater precision as the concentration progressed4 ,to which add that in the gradual establishment of a common and determinate angular velocity1 instead of the various and conflicting angular velocities of different parts1 we have a further change of like nature4 ,according to the hypothesis1 change from indistinct characteristics to distinct ones1 was repeated in the evolution of each planet and satellite2 and may in them be traced to a much greater extent4 ,a gaseous spheroid is less definitely marked off from the space around it than a fluid spheroid1 since it is subject to larger and more rapid undulations of surface1 and to much greater distortions of general form2 and similarly a fluid spheroid1 covered as it must be with waves of various magnitudes1 is less definite than a solid spheroid4 ,nor is it only in greater fixity of surface that a planet in its last stage1 is distinguished from a planet in its earlier stages4 ,its general form1 too1 is more precise4 ,the sphere1 to which in the end it very closely approximates1 is a perfectly specific figure2 while the spheroid1 under which figure it previously existed1 being infinitely variable in oblateness1 is an imperfectly specific figure4 ,and further1 a planet having an axis inclined to the plane of its orbit1 must1 while its form is very oblate1 have its plane of rotation greatly disturbed by the attraction of external bodies2 whereas its approach to a spherical form1 involving a less extreme precessional motion1 implies less marked variations in the direction of its axis4 ,nor is it only in respect of space-relations that the ,solar ,system in general and in detail has become more precise4 ,the like is true of time-relations4 ,during the process of concentration the various portions of the nebulous mass must not only differ more or less from each other in their angular velocities1 but each of them must gradually change the period in which it moves round the general axis4 ,in every detached ring however1 and in the resulting planet1 this progressive alteration ceases3 there results a determinate period of revolution4 ,and similarly the time of axial rotation1 which1 during the formation of each planet1 is continually diminishing1 becomes at last practically fixed3 as in the case of the ,earth1 whose day is not a second less than it was #bjjj years ago4 ,it is scarcely needful to point out that the force-relations have simultaneously become more and more settled4 ,the exact calculations of physical astronomy1 show us how definite these force-relations now are2 while the great indefiniteness which once characterized them1 is implied in the extreme difficulty1 if not impossibility1 of subjecting the nebular hypothesis to mathematical treatment4 ,from that originally molten state of the ,earth inferable from established geological data--a state in harmony with the nebular hypothesis but inexplicable on any other--the transition to its existing state has been through stages in which the characters became more determinate4 ,besides being1 as above pointed out1 comparatively unstable in surface and contour1 a fluid spheroid is less definite than a solid spheroid in having no fixed distribution of parts4 ,currents of molten matter1 though kept to certain general circuits by the conditions of equilibrium1 cannot in the absence of solid boundaries be precise or permanent in direction3 all parts must be in motion with respect to other parts4 ,but a solidification of the surface1 even though but partial1 is manifestly a step towards the establishment of definite relations of position4 ,in a thin crust however1 frequently ruptured as it must be by disturbing forces1 and moved by every tidal undulation1 such fixity of relative position can be but temporary4 ,only as the crust slowly increases in thickness1 can there arise distinct and settled geographical relations4 ,observe too that when1 on a crust that has cooled to the requisite degree1 there begins to precipitate the water floating above as vapour1 the water which is precipitated cannot maintain any definiteness either of state or place4 ,falling on a surface not thick enough to preserve anything beyond slight variations of level1 it must form small shallow deposits over areas sufficiently cool to permit condensation2 which areas must not only pass insensibly into others that are too hot for this1 but must themselves from time to time be so raised in temperature as to drive off the water lying on them4 ,with progressive refrigeration1 however1--with an increasing thickness of crust1 a consequent formation of larger elevations and depressions1 and the condensation of more atmospheric water1 there comes an arrangement of parts that is comparatively fixed in both time and space2 and the definiteness of state and position increases1 until there results such a distribution of continents and oceans as we now see--a distribution that is not only topographically precise1 but also in its cliff-marked coast-lines presents a more definite division of land from water than could have existed during the period when islands of low elevation had shelving beaches up which the tide ebbed and flowed to great distances4 ,respecting the characteristics technically classed as geological1 we may draw parallel inferences4 ,while the ,earth's crust was thin1 mountain-chains were impossibilities3 there could not have been long and well-defined axes of elevation1 with distinct water-sheds and areas of drainage4 ,moreover1 from small islands admitting of but small rivers1 and tidal streams both feeble and narrow1 there would result no clearly-marked sedimentary strata4 ,confused and varying masses of detritus1 such as those now found at the mouths of brooks1 must have been the prevailing formations4 ,and these could give place to distinct strata1 only as there arose continents and oceans1 with their great rivers1 long coast-lines1 and wide-spreading marine currents4 ,how there must simultaneously have resulted more definite meteorological characters1 need not be pointed out in detail4 ,that differences of climates and seasons must have grown relatively decided as the heat of the ,sun became distinguishable from the proper heat of the ,earth2 that the establishment through this cause of comparatively constant atmospheric currents1 must have similarly produced more specific conditions in each locality2 and that these effects must have been aided by increasing permanence in the distribution of land and sea and of ocean currents2 are conclusions which are sufficiently obvious4 ,let us turn now to the evidence furnished by organic bodies4 ,in place of deductive illustrations like the foregoing1 we shall here find numerous illustrations which1 as being inductively established1 are less open to criticism4 ,the process of mammalian development1 for example1 will supply us with numerous proofs ready-described by embryologists4 ,the first change which the ovum of a mammal undergoes1 after continued segmentation has reduced its yelk to a mulberry-like mass1 is the appearance of a greater definiteness in the peripheral cells of this mass3 each of which acquires a distinct enveloping membrane4 ,these peripheral cells1 vaguely distinguished from the internal ones both by their greater completeness and by their minuter subdivision1 coalesce to form the blastoderm or germinal membrane4 ,one portion of the blastoderm presently becomes contrasted with the rest1 through the accumulation of cells still more subdivided1 which1 together1 form an opaque roundish spot4 ,this area germinativa1 as it is called1 is not sharply delineated1 but shades off gradually into the surrounding parts of the blastoderm2 and the area pellucida1 subsequently formed in the midst of this germinal area1 is similarly without any precise margin4 ,the 8primitive trace10 which makes its appearance in the centre of the area pellucida1 and is the rudiment of that vertebrate axis which is to be the fundamental characteristic of the mature animal1 is shown by its name to be at first indefinite--a mere trace4 ,beginning as a shallow groove1 this becomes slowly more pronounced3 its sides grow higher1 their summits overlap1 and at last unite2 and so the indefinite groove passes into a definite tube1 forming the vertebral canal4 ,in this vertebral canal the leading divisions of the brain are at first discernible only as slight bulgings2 while the vertebr commence as indistinct modifications of the tissue bounding the canal4 ,simultaneously1 the outer portion of the blastoderm has been undergoing separation from the inner portion3 there has been a division into the serous and mucous layers--a division at the outset indistinct1 and traceable only about the germinal area1 but which insensibly spreads throughout nearly the whole germinal membrane1 and becomes definite4 ,from the mucous layer1 the development of the alimentary canal proceeds as that of the vertebral canal does from the serous layer4 ,originally a simple channel along the under surface of the embryonic mass1 the intestine is rendered step by step more distinct by the bending down1 on each side1 of ridges which finally join to form a tube--the permanent absorbing surface is by degrees clearly cut off from that temporary absorbing surface of which it was at first a part like all the rest4 ,and in an analogous manner the entire embryo1 which at first lies outspread upon the surface of the yelk-sack1 gradually rises up from it1 and1 by the infolding of its ventral surface1 becomes a separate mass1 connected with the yelk-sack only by a narrow duct4 ,these changes through which the general structure of the embryo is marked out with slowly-increasing precision1 are paralleled in the evolution of each organ4 ,the heart is at first a mere aggregation of cells1 of which the inner liquify to form the cavity1 while the outer are transformed into the walls2 and when thus sketched out1 the heart is indefinite not only as being unlined by limiting membrane1 but also as being but vaguely distinguishable from the great blood-vessels3 of which it is little more than a dilatation4 ,by and by the receiving portion of the cavity becomes distinct from the propelling portion4 ,afterwards there begins to be formed across the ventricle1 a septum1 which1 however1 is some time before it completely shuts off the two halves from each other2 while the later-formed septum of the auricle remains incomplete during the whole of ftal life4 ,again1 the liver commences as a multiplication of certain cells in the wall of the intestine4 ,the thickening produced by this multiplication 8increases so as to form a projection upon the exterior of the canal20 and at the same time that the organ grows and becomes distinct from the intestine1 the channels which permeate it are transformed into ducts having clearly-marked walls4 ,similarly1 by the increase of certain cells of the external coat of the alimentary canal at its upper portion1 are produced buds from which the lungs are developed2 and these1 in their general outlines and detailed structure1 acquire distinctness step by step4 ,changes of this order continue long after birth2 and1 in the human being1 are some of them not completed till middle life4 ,during youth1 most of the articular surfaces of the bones remain rough and fissured--the calcareous deposit ending irregularly in the surrounding cartilage4 ,but between puberty and the age of thirty1 the articular surfaces are finished off by the addition of smooth1 hard1 sharply-cut 8epiphyses40 ,thus we may say that during ,evolution1 an increase of definiteness continues long after there ceases to be any appreciable increase of heterogeneity4 ,and1 indeed1 there is reason to think that those structural modifications which take place after maturity1 ending in old age and death1 are modifications of this nature2 since they result in a growing rigidity of structure1 a consequent restriction of movement and of functional pliability1 a gradual narrowing of the limits within which the vital processes go on1 ending at length in an organic adjustment too precise--too narrow in its margin of possible variation to permit the requisite adaptation to external changes of condition4 ,to demonstrate that the ,earth's ,flora and ,fauna1 regarded either as wholes or in their separate species1 have progressed in definiteness1 is of course no more possible than it was to demonstrate that they have progressed in heterogeneity3 lack of facts being an obstacle to the one conclusion as to the other4 ,if1 however1 we allow ourselves to reason from the hypothesis1 now daily rendered more probable1 that every species of organic form up to the most complex1 has arisen out of the simplest through the accumulation of modifications upon modifications1 just as every individual organic form arises2 we shall see that in such case there must have been a progress from the indeterminate to the determinate1 both in the particular forms and in the groups of forms4 ,we may set out with the significant fact that many of the lowest living organisms 7which are analogous in structure to the germs of all higher ones7 are so indefinite in character that it is difficult1 if not impossible1 to decide whether they are plants or animals4 ,respecting sundry of them there are unsettled disputes between zoologists and botanists2 and it has even been proposed to group them into a separate kingdom1 forming a common basis to the animal and vegetal kingdoms4 ,note next that among the ,protozoa1 extreme indefiniteness of shape is very general4 ,in the shell-less ,rhizopods and their allies1 not only is the form so irregular as to admit of no description1 but it is neither alike in any two individuals nor in the same individual at successive moments4 ,by the aggregation of such creatures1 are produced1 among other indefinite bodies1 the sponges--bodies that are indefinite in size1 in contour1 in internal arrangement1 and in the absence of an external limiting membrane4 ,as further showing the relatively indeterminate character of the simplest organisms1 it may be mentioned that their structures vary very greatly with surrounding conditions3 so much so that1 among the ,protozoa and ,protophyta1 many forms which were once classed as distinct species1 and even as distinct genera1 are found to be merely varieties of one species4 ,if now we call to mind how precise in their attributes are the highest organisms--how sharply cut their outlines1 how invariable their proportions1 and how comparatively constant their structures under changed conditions1 we cannot deny that greater definiteness is one of their characteristics2 and that if they have been evolved out of lower organisms1 an increase of definiteness has been an accompaniment of their evolution4 ,that in course of time1 species have become more sharply marked off from other species1 genera from genera1 and orders from orders1 is a conclusion not admitting of a more positive establishment than the foregoing2 and must1 indeed1 stand or fall with it4 ,if1 however1 species and genera and orders have resulted from the process of 8natural selection10 then1 as ,mr4 ,darwin shows1 there must have been a tendency to divergence1 causing the contrasts between groups to become more and more pronounced4 ,by the disappearance of intermediate forms1 less fitted for special spheres of existence than the extreme forms they connected1 the differences between the extreme forms must be rendered more decided2 and so1 from indistinct and unstable varieties1 must slowly be produced distinct and stable species4 ,of which inference it may be remarked1 not only that it follows from a process to which the organic creation is of necessity ever subject1 but also that it is in harmony with what we know respecting races of men and races of domestic animals4 ,evidence that in the course of psychial development1 there is a change from the vague to the distinct1 may be seen in every nursery4 ,the confusion of the infant's perceptions is shown by its inability to distinguish persons4 ,the dimness of its ideas of direction and distance1 may be inferred from the ill-guided movements of its hands1 and from its endeavours to grasp objects far out of reach4 ,only by degrees does the sense of equilibrium1 needful for safe standing and moving1 gain the requisite precision4 ,through the insensible steps that end in comprehensible speech1 we may trace an increase in the accuracy with which sounds are discriminated and in the nicety with which they are imitated4 ,and similarly during education1 the change is towards the establishment of internal relations more perfectly corresponding to external ones--to exactness in calculations1 to a better representation of objects drawn1 to a more correct spelling1 to a completer conformity to the rules of speech1 to clearer ideas respecting the affairs of life4 ,how in the further progress to maturity the law still holds1 needs not here be pointed out2 more especially as it will presently be shown in treating of the evolution of intelligence during the advance of civilization4 ,the only further fact calling for remark1 is1 that this increase of mental definiteness is1 in some ways1 manifested even during the advance from maturity to old age4 ,the habits of life grow more and more fixed2 the character becomes less capable of change2 the quantity of knowledge previously acquired ceases to have its limits alterable by additions2 and the opinions upon every point admit of no modification4 ,still more manifestly do the successive phases through which societies pass1 display the progress from indeterminate arrangement to determinate arrangement4 ,a wandering tribe of savages1 as being fixed neither in its locality nor in the relative positions of its parts1 is far less definite than a nation1 covering a territory clearly marked out1 and formed of individuals grouped together in towns and villages4 ,in such a tribe the social relations are similarly confused and unsettled4 ,political authority is neither well established nor precise4 ,distinctions of rank are neither clearly marked nor impassable4 8,medicine-men0 and 8rain-makers0 form a class by no means as distinct from the rest of the community as eventually becomes the priesthood they foreshadow4 ,and save in the different occupations of men and women1 there are no complete industrial divisions4 ,only in tribes of considerable size1 which have enslaved other tribes1 is the economical differentiation decided4 ,any one of these primitive societies however that developes1 becomes step by step more specific4 ,increasing in size1 consequently ceasing to be so nomadic1 and restricted in its range by neighbouring tribes1 it acquires1 after prolonged border warfare1 a more settled territorial boundary4 ,the distinction between the royal race and the people1 grows so extreme as to amount in the popular apprehension to a difference of nature4 ,the warrior-class attains a perfect separation from classes devoted to the cultivation of the soil or other occupations regarded as servile4 ,and there arises a priesthood that is defined in its rank1 its functions1 its privileges4 ,this sharpness of definition1 growing both greater and more variously exemplified as societies advance to maturity1 is extremest in those that have reached their full development or are declining4 ,of ancient ,egypt we read that its social divisions were strongly-marked and its customs rigid4 ,recent investigations make it more than ever clear1 that among the ,assyrians and surrounding peoples1 not only were the laws unalterable1 but even the minor habits1 down to those of domestic routine1 possessed a sacredness which insured their permanence4 ,in ,india at the present day1 the unchangeable distinctions of caste1 not less than the constancy in modes of dress1 industrial processes1 and religious observances1 show us how fixed are the arrangements where the antiquity is great4 ,nor does ,china with its long-settled political organization1 its elaborate and precise conventions1 and its unprogressive literature1 fail to exemplify the same truth4 ,the successive phases of our own and neighbouring societies1 furnish facts somewhat different in kind but similar in meaning4 ,after our leading class-divisions had become tolerably well-established1 it was long before they acquired their full precision4 ,originally1 monarchical authority was more baronial1 and baronial authority more monarchical1 than they afterwards became4 ,between modern priests and the priests of old times1 who while officially teachers of religion were also warriors1 judges1 architects1 there is a marked difference in definiteness of function4 ,and among the people engaged in productive occupations1 the like contrast would be found to hold3 the industrial office has become more distinct from the military2 and its various divisions from each other4 ,a history of our constitution1 reminding us how1 after prolonged struggles1 the powers of ,king1 ,lords1 and ,commons1 have been gradually settled1 would clearly exhibit analogous changes4 ,countless facts bearing the like construction would meet us1 were we to trace the development of legislation3 in the successive stages of which1 we should find statutes made more precise in their provisions--more specific in their applications to particular cases4 ,even at the present time we see that each new law1 beginning as a vague proposition1 is1 in the course of enactment1 elaborated into specific clauses2 and further that only after its interpretation has been established by judges' decisions in courts of justice1 does it reach its final definiteness4 ,from the history of minor institutions like evidence may be gathered4 ,religious1 charitable1 literary1 and all other societies1 beginning with ends and methods roughly sketched out and easily modifiable1 show us how1 by the accumulation of rules and precedents1 the purposes become more distinct and the modes of action more restricted2 until at last death often results from a fixity which admits of no adaptation to new conditions4 ,should it be objected that among civilized nations there are examples of decreasing definiteness1 7instance the breaking down of limits between ranks17 the reply is1 that such apparent exceptions are the accompaniments of a social metamorphosis--a change from the military or predatory type of social structure1 to the industrial or mercantile type1 during which the old lines of organization are disappearing and the new ones becoming more marked4 ,that all organized results of social action1 pass in the course of civilization through parallel phases1 is demonstrable4 ,being1 as they are1 objective products of subjective processes1 they must display corresponding changes2 and that they do this1 the cases of ,language1 of ,science1 of ,art1 clearly prove4 ,if we strike out from our sentences everything but nouns and verbs1 we shall perceive how extremely vague is the expression of ideas in undeveloped tongues4 ,when we note how each inflection of a verb or addition by which the case of a noun is marked1 serves to limit the conditions of action or of existence1 we see that these constituents of speech enable men more precisely to communicate their thoughts4 ,that the application of an adjective to a noun or an adverb to a verb1 narrows the class of things or changes indicated1 implies that these additional words serve further to define the meaning4 ,and similarly with other parts of speech4 ,the like effect results from the multiplication of words of each order4 ,when the names for objects1 and acts1 and qualities1 are but few1 the range of each is proportionately wide1 and its meaning therefore unspecific4 ,the similes and metaphors so abundantly used by aboriginal races1 are simply vehicles for indirectly and imperfectly conveying ideas1 which lack of words disables them from conveying directly and perfectly4 ,in contrasting these figurative expressions1 interpretable in various senses1 with the expressions which we should use in place of them1 the increase of exactness which wealth of language gives1 is rendered very obvious4 ,or to take a case from ordinary life1 if we compare the speech of the peasant1 who1 out of his limited vocabulary1 can describe the contents of the bottle he carries1 only as 8doctor's-stuff0 which he has got for his 8sick0 wife1 with the speech of the physician1 who tells those educated like himself the particular composition of the medicine1 and the particular disorder for which he has prescribed it2 we have vividly brought home to us1 the precision which language gains by the multiplication of terms4 ,again1 in the course of its evolution1 each tongue acquires a further accuracy through processes which fix the meaning of each word4 ,intellectual intercourse tends gradually to diminish laxity of expression4 ,by and by dictionaries give definitions4 ,and eventually1 among the most cultivated1 indefiniteness is not tolerated1 either in the terms used or in their grammatical combinations4 ,once more1 languages considered as wholes1 become gradually more distinct from each other1 and from their common parent3 as witness in early times the divergence from the same root of two languages so unlike as ,greek and ,latin1 and in later times the development of three ,latin dialects into ,italian1 ,french1 and ,spanish4 ,in his 8,history of the ,inductive ,sciences10 ,dr4 ,whewell says that the ,greeks failed in physical philosophy because their 8ideas were not distinct1 and appropriate to the facts40 ,i do not quote this remark for its luminousness2 since it would be equally proper to ascribe the indistinctness and inappropriateness of their ideas to the imperfection of their physical philosophy2 but ,i quote it because it serves as good evidence of the indefiniteness of primitive science4 ,the same work and its fellow on 8,the ,philosophy of the ,inductive ,sciences10 supply other evidences equally good1 because equally independent of any such hypothesis as is here to be established4 ,respecting mathematics we have the fact that geometrical theorems grew out of empirical methods2 and that these theorems1 at first isolated1 did not acquire the clearness which complete demonstration gives1 until they were arranged by ,euclid into a series of dependent propositions4 ,at a later period the same general truth was exemplified in the progress from the 8method of exhaustions0 and the 8method of indivisibles0 to the 8method of limits20 which is the central idea of the infinitesimal calculus4 ,in early mechanics1 too1 may be traced a dim perception that action and re-action are equal and opposite2 though for ages after1 this truth remained unformulated4 ,and similarly1 the property of inertia1 though not distinctly comprehended until ,kepler lived1 was vaguely recognized long previously4 8,the conception of statical force10 8was never presented in a distinct form till the works of ,archimedes appeared20 and 8the conception of accelerating force was confused1 in the mind of ,kepler and his contemporaries1 and did not become clear enough for purposes of sound scientific reasoning before the succeeding century40 ,to which specific assertions may be added the general remark1 that 8terms which originally1 and before the laws of motion were fully known1 were used in a very vague and fluctuating sense1 were afterwards limited and rendered precise40 ,when we turn from abstract scientific conceptions to the concrete previsions of science1 of which astronomy furnishes us with numerous examples1 the like contrast is visible4 ,the times at which celestial phenomena will occur1 have been predicted with ever-increasing accuracy3 errors once amounting to days1 have been reduced down to seconds4 ,the correspondence between the real and supposed forms of orbits1 has been growing gradually more precise4 ,originally thought circular1 then epicyclical1 then elliptical1 orbits are now ascertained to be curves which always deviate more or less from perfect ellipses1 and which are ever undergoing change4 ,but the general advance of ,science in definiteness1 is best shown by the contrast between its qualitative stage1 and its quantitative stage4 ,at first1 the facts ascertained were1 that between such and such phenomena some connexion existed--that the appearances a and b always occurred together or in succession2 but it was neither known what was the nature of the relation between a and b1 nor how much of a accompanied so much of b4 ,the development of ,science has in part been the reduction of these vague connexions to distinct ones4 ,most relations have been determined as belonging to the classes mechanical1 chemical1 thermal1 electric1 magnetic1 c42 and we have learnt to infer the amounts of the antecedents and consequents from each other with an exactness that becomes ever greater4 ,were there space to state them1 illustrations of this truth might be cited from all departments of physics2 but it must suffice here to instance the general progress of chemistry4 ,besides the conspicuous fact that we have positively ascertained the constituent elements of an immense number of compounds which our ancestors could not analyze1 and of a far greater number which they never even saw1 there is the still more conspicuous fact that the combining equivalents of these elements are accurately calculated4 ,the beginnings of a like advance from qualitative to quantitative prevision1 may be traced even in some of the higher sciences4 ,physiology shows it in the weighing and measuring of organic products1 and of the materials consumed4 ,by ,pathology it is displayed in the use of the statistical method of determining the sources of diseases1 and the effects of treatment4 ,in ,zoology and ,botany1 the numerical comparisons of ,floras and ,faunas1 leading to specific conclusions respecting their sources and distributions1 illustrate it4 ,and in ,sociology1 questionable as are the conclusions usually drawn from the classified sum-totals of the census1 from ,board-of-,trade tables1 and from criminal returns1 it must be admitted that these imply a progress towards more accurate conceptions of social phenomena4 ,that an essential characteristic of advancing ,science is increase in definiteness1 appears indeed almost a truism1 when we remember that ,science may be described as definite knowledge1 in contradistinction to that indefinite knowledge possessed by the uncultured4 ,and if1 as we cannot question1 ,science has1 in the slow course of ages1 been evolved out of this indefinite knowledge of the uncultured2 then1 the gradual acquirement of that great definiteness which now distinguishes it1 must have been a leading trait in its evolution4 ,the ,arts1 industrial and sthetic1 furnish illustrations perhaps still more striking4 ,flint implements of the kind recently found in certain of the later geologic deposits--implements so rude that some have held them to be of natural rather than of artificial origin--show the extreme want of precision in men's first handyworks4 ,though a great advance on these is seen in the tools and weapons of existing savage tribes1 yet an inexactness in forms and fittings1 more than anything else distinguishes such tools and weapons from those of civilized races4 ,in a less degree1 the productions of semi-barbarous nations are characterized by like defects4 ,a ,chinese junk with all its contained furniture and appliances1 nowhere presents a perfectly straight line1 a uniform curve1 or a true surface4 ,nor do the utensils and machines of our ancestors fail to exhibit a similar inferiority to our own4 ,an antique chair1 an old fireplace1 a lock of the last century1 or almost any article of household use that has been preserved for a few generations1 will prove by contrast how greatly the industrial products of our time excel those of the past in their accuracy4 ,since planing machines have been invented1 it has become possible to produce absolutely straight lines1 and surfaces so truly level as to be air-tight when applied to each other4 ,while in the dividing-engine of ,troughton1 in the micrometer of ,whitworth1 and in microscopes that show fifty thousand divisions to the inch1 we have an exactness as far exceeding that reached in the works of our great-grandfathers1 as theirs exceeded that of the aboriginal celt-makers4 ,in the ,fine ,arts there has been a parallel process4 ,from the rudely carved and painted idols of savages1 through the early sculptures characterized by limbs having no muscular detail1 wooden-looking drapery1 and faces devoid of individuality1 up to the later statues of the ,greeks or some of those now produced1 the increased accuracy of representation is conspicuous4 ,compare the mural paintings of the ,egyptians with the paintings of medieval ,europe1 or these with modern paintings1 and the more precise rendering of the appearances of objects is manifest4 ,so too is it with the delineations of fiction and the drama4 ,in the marvellous tales current among ,eastern nations1 in the romantic legends of feudal ,europe1 as well as in the mystery-plays and those immediately succeeding them1 we see great want of correspondence to the realities of life2 not only in the predominance of supernatural events and extremely improbable coincidences1 but also in the vaguely-indicated personages1 who are nothing more than embodiments of virtue and vice in general1 or at best of particular virtues and vices4 ,through transitions that need not be specified1 there has been a progressive diminution1 in both fiction and the drama1 of whatever is unnatural--whatever does not answer to real life4 ,and now1 novels and plays are applauded in proportion to the fidelity with which they exhibit individual characters with their motives and consequent actions2 improbabilities1 like the impossibilities which preceded them1 are disallowed2 and there is even an incipient abandonment of those elaborate plots which the realities of life rarely if ever furnish4 ,were it needful1 it would be easy to accumulate evidences of various other kinds4 ,the progress from myths and legends1 extreme in their misrepresentations1 to a history that has slowly become1 and is still becoming1 more accurate2 the establishment of settled systematic methods of doing things1 instead of the indeterminate ways at first pursued2 and the great increase in the number of points on which conflicting opinion has settled down into exact knowledge2 might severally be used further to exemplify the general truth enunciated4 ,the basis of induction is1 however1 already sufficiently wide4 ,proof that all ,evolution is from the indefinite to the definite1 we find to be not less abundant than proof that all ,evolution is from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous4 ,the one kind of change is co-extensive with the other--is equally with it exhibited throughout ,nature4 99 99 99 99 99 #ef4 ,to form a complete conception of ,evolution1 we have to contemplate it under yet another aspect4 ,this advance from the indefinite to the definite1 is obviously not primary but secondary--is an incidental result attendant on the finishing of certain changes4 ,the transformation of a whole that was originally uniform1 into a combination of multiform parts1 implies a progressive separation4 ,while this is going on there must be indistinctness4 ,only as each separated division draws into its general mass those diffused peripheral portions which are at first imperfectly disunited from the peripheral portions of neighbouring divisions1 can it acquire anything like a precise outline4 ,and it cannot become perfectly definite until its units are aggregated into a compact whole4 ,that is to say1 the acquirement of definiteness is simply a concomitant of complete union of the elements constituting each component division4 ,thus1 ,evolution is characterized not only by a continuous multiplication of parts1 but also by a growing oneness in each part4 ,and while an advance in heterogeneity results from progressive differentiation1 an advance in definiteness results from progressive integration4 ,the two changes are simultaneous2 or are rather opposite aspects of the same change4 ,this change1 however1 cannot be rightly comprehended without looking at both its sides4 ,let us then once more consider ,evolution under its several manifestations2 for the purpose of noting how it is throughout a process of integration4 ,the illustrations furnished by the ,solar ,system1 supposing it to have had a nebular origin1 are so obvious as scarcely to need indicating4 ,that as a whole1 it underwent a gradual concentration while assuming its present distribution of parts2 and that there subsequently took place a like concentration of the matter forming each planet and satellite1 is the leading feature of the hypothesis4 ,the process of integration is here seen in its simplest and most decided form4 ,geologic evolution1 if we trace it up from that molten state of the ,earth's substance which we are obliged to postulate1 supplies us with more varied facts of like meaning4 ,the advance from a thin crust1 at first everywhere fissured and moveable1 to a crust so solid and thick as to be but now and then very partially dislocated by disturbing forces1 exemplifies the unifying process2 as does likewise the advance from a surface covered with small patches of land and water1 to one divided into continents and oceans--an advance also resulting from the ,earth's gradual solidification4 ,moreover1 the collection of detritus into strata of great extent1 and the union of such strata into extensive 8systems10 becomes possible only as surfaces of land and water become wide1 and subsidences great1 in both area and depth2 whence it follows that integrations of this order must have grown more pronounced as the ,earth's crust thickened4 ,different and simpler instances of the process through which mixed materials are separated1 and the kindred units aggregated into masses1 are exhibited in the detailed structure of the ,earth4 ,the phenomena of crystallization may be cited en masse1 as showing how the unifications of similar elements take place wherever the conditions permit4 ,not only do we see this where there is little or no hindrance to the approach of the particles1 as in the cases of crystals formed from solutions1 or by sublimation2 but it is also seen where there are great obstacles to their approach4 ,the flints and the nodules of iron pyrites that are found in chalk1 as well as the silicious concretions which occasionally occur in limestone1 can be interpreted only as aggregations of atoms of silex or sulphuret of iron1 originally diffused almost uniformly through the deposit1 but gradually collected round certain centres1 notwithstanding the solid or semi-solid state of the surrounding matter4 ,iron-stone as it ordinarily occurs1 presents a similar phenomenon to be similarly explained2 and what is called bog iron-ore supplies the conditions and the result in still more obvious correlation4 ,during the evolution of an organism1 there occurs1 as every physiologist knows1 not only separation of parts1 but coalescence of parts4 ,in the mammalian embryo1 the heart1 at first a long pulsating blood-vessel1 by and by twists upon itself and becomes integrated4 ,the layer of bile-cells constituting the rudimentary liver1 do not simply become different from the wall of the intestine in which they at first lie2 but they simultaneously diverge from it and consolidate into an organ4 ,the anterior segments of the cerebro-spinal axis1 which are at first continuous with the rest1 and distinguished only by their larger size1 undergo a gradual union2 and at the same time the resulting head consolidates into a mass clearly marked off from the rest of the vertebral column4 ,the like process1 variously exemplified in other organs1 is meanwhile exhibited by the body as a whole2 which becomes integrated1 somewhat in the same way that the contents of an outspread handkerchief become integrated when its edges are drawn in and fastened to make a bundle4 ,analogous changes go on long after birth1 and continue even up to old age4 ,in the human being that gradual solidification of the bony framework1 which1 during childhood1 is seen in the coalescence of portions of the same bone ossified from different centres1 is afterwards seen in the coalescence of bones that were originally distinct4 ,the appendages of the vertebr unite with the vertebral centres to which they belong--a change not completed until towards thirty4 ,at the same time the epiphyses1 formed separately from the main bodies of their respective bones1 have their cartilaginous connexions turned into osseous ones--are fused to the masses beneath them4 ,the component vertebr of the sacrum1 which remain separate till about the sixteenth year1 then begin to unite2 and in ten or a dozen years more their union is complete4 ,still later occurs the coalescence of the coccygeal vertebr2 and there are some other bony unions which are not completed until advanced age4 ,to which add that the increase of density and toughness1 going on throughout the tissues in general during life1 may be regarded as the formation of a more highly integrated substance4 ,the species of change thus illustrated under its several aspects in the unfolding of the human body1 may be traced in all animals4 ,that mode of it which consists in the union of homogeneous parts originally separate1 has been described by ,milne-,edwards and others1 as exhibited in various of the invertebrata2 though it does not seem to have been included by them as an essential peculiarity in the process of organic development4 ,we shall1 however1 be led strongly to suspect that progressive integration should form part of the definition of this process1 when we find it displayed not only in tracing up the stages passed through by every embryo1 but also in ascending from the lower living creatures to the higher4 ,and here1 as in the evolution of individual organisms1 it goes on both longitudinally and transversely3 under which different forms we may indeed most conveniently consider it4 ,of longitudinal integration1 the sub-kingdom ,annulosa supplies abundant examples4 ,its lower members1 such as worms and myriapods1 are mostly characterized by the great number of segments composing them3 reaching in some cases to several hundreds4 ,but in the higher divisions--crustaceans1 insects1 and spiders--we find this number reduced down to twenty-two1 thirteen1 or even fewer2 while1 accompanying the reduction1 there is a shortening or integration of the whole body1 reaching its extreme in the crab and the spider4 ,the significance of these contrasts1 as bearing upon the general doctrine of ,evolution1 will be seen when it is pointed out that they are parallel to those which arise during the development of individual ,annulosa4 ,in the lobster1 the head and thorax form one compact box1 made by the union of a number of segments which in the embryo were separable4 ,similarly1 the butterfly shows us segments so much more closely united than they were in the caterpillar1 as to be1 some of them1 no longer distinguishable from each other4 ,the ,vertebrata again1 throughout their successively higher classes1 furnish like instances of longitudinal union4 ,in most fishes1 and in reptiles that have no limbs1 the only segments of the spinal column that coalesce1 are those forming the skull4 ,in most mammals and in birds1 a variable number of vertebr become fused together to form the sacrum2 and in the higher quadrumana and man1 the caudal vertebr also lose their separate individualities in a single os coccygis4 ,that which we may distinguish as transverse integration1 is well illustrated among the ,annulosa in the development of the nervous system4 ,leaving out those most degraded forms which do not present distinct ganglia1 it is to be observed that the lower annulose animals1 in common with the larv of the higher1 are severally characterized by a double chain of ganglia running from end to end of the body2 while in the more perfectly formed annulose animals1 this double chain becomes more or less completely united into a single chain4 ,mr4 ,newport has described the course of this concentration as exhibited in insects2 and by ,rathke it has been traced in crustaceans4 ,during the early stages of the ,astacus fluviatilis1 or common cray-fish1 there is a pair of separate ganglia to each ring4 ,of the fourteen pairs belonging to the head and thorax1 the three pairs in advance of the mouth consolidate into one mass to form the brain1 or cephalic ganglion4 ,meanwhile1 out of the remainder1 the first six pairs severally unite in the median line1 while the rest remain more or less separate4 ,of these six double ganglia thus formed1 the anterior four coalesce into one mass2 the remaining two coalesce into another mass2 and then these two masses coalesce into one4 ,here we see longitudinal and transverse integration going on simultaneously2 and in the highest crustaceans they are both carried still further4 ,the ,vertebrata clearly exhibit transverse integration in the development of the generative system4 ,the lowest of the mammalia--the ,monotremata--in common with birds1 to which they are in many respects allied1 have oviducts which towards their lower extremities are dilated into cavities1 severally performing in an imperfect way the function of a uterus4 8,in the ,marsupialia there is a closer approximation of the two lateral sets of organs on the median line2 for the oviducts converge towards one another and meet 7without coalescing7 on the median line2 so that their uterine dilatations are in contact with each other1 forming a true #8double uterus4444' ,as we ascend the series of #8placental' mammals1 we find the lateral coalescence becoming more and more complete4444 ,in many of the ,rodentia the uterus still remains completely divided into two lateral halves2 whilst in others these coalesce at their lower portions1 forming a rudiment of the true #8body' of the uterus in the human subject4 ,this part increases at the expense of the lateral #8cornua' in the higher herbivora and carnivora2 but even in the lower quadrumana the uterus is somewhat cleft at its summit40#aj ,in the social organism integrative changes are not less clearly and abundantly exemplified4 ,uncivilized societies display them when wandering families1 such as the bushmen show us1 unite into tribes of considerable numbers4 ,among these we see a further progress of like nature everywhere manifested in the subjugation of weaker tribes by stronger ones2 and in the subordination of their respective chiefs to the conquering chief4 ,the partial combinations thus resulting1 which among aboriginal races are being continually formed and continually broken up1 become1 among the superior races1 both more complete and more permanent4 ,if we trace the metamorphoses through which our own society1 or any adjacent one1 has passed1 we see this unification from time to time repeated on a larger scale and with increasing stability4 ,the aggregation of juniors and the children of juniors under elders and the children of elders2 the consequent establishment of groups of vassals bound to their respective nobles2 the subordination afterwards established of groups of inferior nobles to dukes or earls2 and the still later establishment of the kingly power over dukes or earls2 are so many instances of increasing consolidation4 ,this process through which petty tenures are combined into feuds1 feuds into provinces1 provinces into kingdoms1 and finally contiguous kingdoms into a single one1 slowly completes itself by destroying the original lines of demarcation4 ,and it may be further remarked of the ,european nations as a whole1 that in the tendency to form alliances more or less lasting1 in the restraining influences exercised by the several governments over each other1 in the system that is gradually establishing itself of settling international disputes by congresses1 as well as in the breaking down of commercial barriers and the increasing facilities of communication1 we may trace the incipient stage of a ,european confederation--a still larger integration than any now established4 ,but it is not only in these external unions of groups with groups1 and of the compound groups with each other1 that the general law is exemplified4 ,it is exemplified also in unions that take place internally1 as the groups become more highly organized4 ,these1 of which the most conspicuous are commercial in their origin and function1 are well illustrated in our own society4 ,we have integrations consequent on the simple growth of adjacent parts performing like functions3 as1 for instance1 the junction of ,manchester with its calico-weaving suburbs4 ,we have other integrations that arise when1 out of several places producing a particular commodity1 one monopolizes more and more of the business1 and leaves the rest to dwindle3 as witness the growth of the ,yorkshire cloth-districts at the expense of those in the west of ,england2 or the absorption by ,staffordshire of the pottery-manufacture1 and the consequent decay of the establishments that once flourished at ,worcester1 ,derby1 and elsewhere4 ,and we have those yet other integrations produced by the actual approximation of the similarly-occupied parts3 whence result such facts as the concentration of publishers in ,paternoster ,row2 of lawyers in the ,temple and neighbourhood2 of corn-merchants about ,mark ,lane2 of civil engineers in ,great ,george ,street2 of bankers in the centre of the city4 ,industrial combinations that consist1 not in the approximation or fusion of parts1 but in the establishment of common centres of connexion1 are exhibited in the ,bank clearing-house and the ,railway clearing-house4 ,while of yet another genus are those unions which bring into relation the more or less dispersed citizens who are occupied in like ways3 as traders are brought by the ,exchange and the ,stock-,exchange2 and as are professional men by institutes1 like those of ,civil ,engineers1 ,architects1 c4 ,here1 as before1 it is manifest that a law of ,evolution which holds of organisms1 must hold too of all objective results of their activity2 and that hence ,language1 and ,science1 and ,art1 must not only in the course of their development display increasing heterogeneity and definiteness1 but also increasing integration4 ,we shall find this conclusion to be in harmony with the facts4 ,among uncivilized races1 the many-syllabled terms used for not uncommon objects1 as well as the descriptive character of proper names1 show us that the words used for the less familiar things are formed by compounding the words used for the more familiar things4 ,this process of composition is sometimes found in its incipient stage--a stage in which the component words are temporarily united to signify some unnamed object1 and do not 7from lack of frequent use7 permanently cohere4 ,but in the majority of inferior languages1 the process of 8agglutination10 as it is called1 has gone far enough to produce considerable stability in the compound words3 there is a manifest integration4 ,how small is the degree of this integration1 however1 when compared with that reached in well-developed languages is shown both by the great length of the compound words used for things and acts of constant occurrence1 and by the separableness of their elements4 ,certain ,north-,american tongues very well illustrate this4 ,in a ,ricaree vocabulary extending to fifty names of common objects1 which in ,english are nearly all expressed by single syllables1 there is not one monosyllabic word2 and in the nearly-allied vocabulary of the ,pawnees1 the names for these same common objects are monosyllabic in but two instances4 ,things so familiar to these hunting tribes as dog and bow1 are1 in the ,pawnee language1 ashakish and teeragish2 the hand and the eyes are respectively iksheeree and keereekoo2 for day the term is shakoorooeeshairet1 and for devil it is tsaheekshkakooraiwah2 while the numerals are composed of from two syllables up to five1 and in ,ricaree up to seven4 ,that the great length of these familiar words implies a low degree of development1 and that in the formation of higher languages out of lower there is a progressive integration1 which reduces the polysyllables to dissyllables and monosyllables1 is an inference fully confirmed by the history of our own language4 ,anglo-,saxon steorra has been in course of time consolidated into ,english star1 mona into moon1 and nama into name4 ,the transition through the intermediate semi-,saxon is clearly traceable4 ,sunu became in semi-,saxon sune1 and in ,english son3 the final e of sune being an evanescent form of the original u4 ,the change from the ,anglo-,saxon plural1 formed by the distinct syllable as1 to our plural formed by the appended consonant s1 shows us the same thing3 smithas in becoming smiths1 and endas in becoming ends1 illustrate progressive coalescence4 ,so too does the disappearance of the terminal an in the infinitive mood of verbs2 as shown in the transition from the ,anglo-,saxon cuman to the semi-,saxon cumme1 and to the ,english come4 ,moreover the process has been slowly going on1 even since what we distinguish as ,english was formed4 ,in ,elizabeth's time1 verbs were still very frequently pluralized by the addition of en--we tell was we tellen2 and in some rural districts this form of speech may even now be heard4 ,in like manner the terminal ed of the past tense1 has united with the word it modifies4 ,burn-ed has in pronunciation become burnt2 and even in writing the terminal t has in some cases taken the place of the ed4 ,only where antique forms in general are adhered to1 as in the church-service1 is the distinctness of this inflection still maintained4 ,further1 we see that the compound vowels have been in many cases fused into single vowels4 ,that in bread the e and a were originally both sounded1 is proved by the fact that they are still so sounded in parts where old habits linger4 ,we1 however1 have contracted the pronunciation into bred2 and we have made like changes in many other common words4 ,lastly1 let it be noted that where the frequency of repetition is greatest1 the process is carried furthest2 as instance the contraction of lord 7originally laford7 into lud in the mouths of ,barristers2 and still better the coalescence of ,god be with you into ,good bye4 ,besides exhibiting in this way the integrative process1 ,language equally exhibits it throughout all grammatical development4 ,the lowest kinds of human speech1 having merely nouns and verbs without inflections to them1 manifestly permit no such close union of the elements of a proposition as results when the relations are either marked by inflections or by words specially used for purposes of connexion4 ,such speech is necessarily what we significantly call 8incoherent40 ,to a considerable extent1 incoherence is seen in the ,chinese language4 8,if1 instead of saying ,i go to ,london1 figs come from ,turkey1 the sun shines through the air1 we said1 ,i go end ,london1 figs come origin ,turkey1 the sun shines passage air1 we should discourse of the manner of the ,chinese40 ,from this 8aptotic0 form1 there is clear evidence of a transition by coalescence to a form in which the connexions of words are expressed by the addition to them of certain inflectional words4 8,in ,languages like the ,chinese10 remarks ,dr ,latham1 8the separate words most in use to express relation may become adjuncts or annexes40 ,to this he adds the fact that 8the numerous inflexional languages fall into two classes4 ,in one1 the inflexions have no appearance of having been separate words4 ,in the other1 their origin as separate words is demonstrable40 ,from which the inference drawn is1 that the 8aptotic0 languages1 by the more and more constant use of adjuncts1 gave rise to the 8agglutinate0 languages1 or those in which the original separateness of the inflexional parts can be traced2 and that out of these1 by further use1 arose the 8amalgamate0 languages1 or these in which the original separateness of the inflexional parts can no longer be traced4 ,strongly corroborative of this inference is the unquestionable fact1 that by such a process there have grown out of the amalgamate languages1 the 8anaptotic0 languages2 of which our own is the most perfect example--languages in which1 by further consolidation1 inflexions have almost disappeared1 while1 to express the verbal relations1 certain new kinds of words have been developed4 ,when we see the ,anglo-,saxon inflexions gradually lost by contraction during the development of ,english1 and1 though to a less degree1 the ,latin inflexions dwindling away during the development of ,french1 we cannot deny that grammatical structure is modified by integration2 and seeing how clearly the earlier stages of grammatical structure are explained by it1 we can scarcely doubt that it has been going on from the first4 ,and now mark that in proportion to the degree of the integration above described1 is the extent to which integration of another order is shown4 ,aptotic languages are1 as already pointed out1 necessarily incoherent--the elements of a proposition cannot be tied into a definite and complete whole4 ,but as fast as coalescence produces inflected words1 it becomes possible to unite them into sentences of which the parts are so mutually dependent that no considerable change can be made without destroying the meaning4 ,yet a further stage in this process may be noted4 ,after the development of those grammatical forms which make definite statements possible1 we do not at first find them used to express anything beyond statements of a simple kind4 ,a single subject with a single predicate1 accompanied by but few qualifying terms1 are usually all4 ,if we compare1 for instance1 the ,hebrew scriptures with writings of modern times1 a marked difference of aggregation among the groups of words1 is visible4 ,in the number of subordinate propositions which accompany the principal one2 in the various complements to subjects and predicates2 and in the numerous qualifying clauses--all of them united into one complex whole--many sentences in modern composition exhibit a degree of integration not to be found in ancient ones4 ,the history of ,science presents facts of the same meaning at every step4 ,indeed the integration of groups of like entities and like relations1 may be said to constitute the most conspicuous part of scientific progress4 ,a glance at the classificatory sciences1 shows us not only that the confused aggregations which the vulgar make of natural objects1 are differentiated into groups that are respectively more homogeneous1 but also that these groups are gradually rendered complete and compact4 ,while1 instead of considering all marine creatures as fish1 shell-fish1 and jelly-fish1 ,zoology establishes divisions and sub-divisions under the heads ,vertebrata1 ,annulosa1 ,mollusca1 c4--while in place of the wide and vague assemblage popularly described as 8creeping things10 it makes the specific classes ,annelida1 ,myriopoda1 ,insecta1 ,arachnida2 it at the same time gives to these an increasing consolidation4 ,the several orders and genera of which each consists1 are arranged according to their affinities and bound together under common definitions2 at the same time that1 by extended observation and rigorous criticism1 the previously unknown and undetermined forms are integrated with their respective congeners4 ,nor is the same process less clearly manifested in those sciences which have for their subject-matter1 not classified objects1 but classified relations4 ,under one of its chief aspects1 the advance of ,science is the advance of generalization2 and generalization is the uniting into groups all like co-existencies and sequences among phenomena4 ,not only1 however1 does the colligation of a number of concrete relations into a generalization of the lowest order1 exemplify the principle enunciated2 but it is again and again exemplified in the colligation of these lowest generalizations into higher ones1 and these into still higher ones4 ,year by year are established certain connexions among orders of phenomena that seem wholly unallied2 and these connexions1 multiplying and strengthening1 gradually bring the seemingly unallied orders under a common bond4 ,when1 for example1 ,humboldt quotes the saying of the ,swiss--8it is going to rain because we hear the murmur of the torrents nearer10--when he remarks the relation between this and an observation of his own1 that the cataracts of the ,orinoco are heard at a greater distance by night than by day--when he notes the essential parallelism existing between these facts and the fact that the unusual visibility of remote objects is also an indication of coming rain--and when he points out that the common cause of these variations is the smaller hindrance offered to the passage of both light and sound1 by media which are comparatively homogeneous1 either in temperature or hygrometric state2 he helps in bringing under one generalization the phenomena of light and those of sound4 ,experiment having shown that these conform to like laws of reflection and refraction1 the conclusion that they are both produced by undulations gains probability3 there is an incipient integration of two great orders of phenomena1 between which no connexion was suspected in times past4 ,a still more decided integration has been of late taking place between the once independent sub-sciences of ,electricity1 ,magnetism1 and ,light4 ,and indeed it must be obvious to those who are familiar with the present state of ,science1 that there will eventually take place a far wider integration1 by which all orders of phenomena will be combined as differently conditioned forms of one ultimate fact4 ,nor do the industrial and sthetic ,arts fail to supply us with equally conclusive evidence4 ,the progress from rude1 small1 and simple tools1 to perfect1 complex1 and large machines1 illustrates not only a progress in heterogeneity and in definiteness1 but also in integration4 ,among what are classed as the mechanical powers1 the advance from the lever to the wheel-and-axle is an advance from a simple agent to an agent made up of several simple ones combined together4 ,on comparing the wheel-and-axle1 or any of the machines used in early times with those used now1 we find an essential difference to be1 that in each of our machines several of the primitive machines are united into one4 ,a modern apparatus for spinning or weaving1 for making stockings or lace1 contains not simply a lever1 an inclined plane1 a screw1 a wheel-and-axle1 united together2 but several of each integrated into one complex whole4 ,again1 in early ages1 when horse-power and man-power were alone employed1 the motive agent was not bound up with the tool moved2 but the two have now become in many cases fused together3 the fire-box and boiler of a locomotive are combined with the machinery which the steam works4 ,nor is this the most extreme case4 ,a still more extensive integration is exhibited in every large factory4 ,here we find a large number of complicated machines1 all connected by driving shafts with the same steam-engine--all united with it into one vast apparatus4 ,contrast the mural decorations of the ,egyptians and ,assyrians with modern historical paintings1 and there becomes manifest a great advance in unity of composition--in the subordination of the parts to the whole4 ,one of these ancient frescoes is in truth made up of a number of pictures that have little mutual dependence4 ,the several figures of which each group consists1 show very imperfectly by their attitudes1 and not at all by their expressions1 the relations in which they stand to each other2 the respective groups might be separated with but little loss of meaning2 and the centre of chief interest1 which should link all parts together1 is often inconspicuous4 ,the same trait may be noted in the tapestries of medieval days4 ,representing perhaps a hunting scene1 one of these exhibits men1 horses1 dogs1 beasts1 birds1 trees1 and flowers1 miscellaneously dispersed3 the living objects being variously occupied1 and mostly with no apparent consciousness of each other's proximity4 ,but in the paintings since produced1 faulty as many of them are in this respect1 there is always a more or less manifest co-ordination of parts--an arrangement of attitudes1 expressions1 lights1 and colours1 such as to combine the picture into an organic whole2 and the success with which unity of effect is educed from variety of components1 is a chief test of merit4 ,in music1 progressive integration is displayed in still more numerous ways4 ,the simple cadence embracing but a few notes1 which in the chants of savages is monotonously repeated1 becomes among civilized races1 a long series of different musical phrases combined into one whole2 and so complete is the integration1 that the melody cannot be broken off in the middle1 nor shorn of its final note1 without giving us a painful sense of incompleteness4 ,when to the air1 a bass1 a tenor1 and an alto are added2 and when to the harmony of different voice-parts there is added an accompaniment2 we see exemplified integrations of another order1 which grow gradually more elaborate4 ,and the process is carried a stage higher when these complex solos1 concerted pieces1 choruses1 and orchestral effects1 are combined into the vast ensemble of a musical drama2 of which1 be it remembered1 the artistic perfection largely consists in the subordination of the particular effects to the total effect4 ,once more the ,arts of literary delineation1 narrative and dramatic1 furnish us with parallel illustrations4 ,the tales of primitive times1 like those with which the story-tellers of the ,east still daily amuse their listeners1 are made up of successive occurrences that are not only in themselves unnatural1 but have no natural connexion3 they are but so many separate adventures put together without necessary sequence4 ,but in a good modern work of imagination1 the events are the proper products of the characters working under given conditions2 and cannot at will be changed in their order or kind1 without injuring or destroying the general effect4 ,and further1 the characters themselves1 which in early fictions play their respective parts without showing us how their minds are modified by each other or by the events1 are now presented to us as held together by complex moral relations1 and as acting and re-acting upon each other's natures4 ,evolution1 then1 is in all cases a change from a more diffused or incoherent form1 to a more consolidated or coherent form4 ,this proves to be a characteristic displayed equally in those earliest changes which the ,universe as a whole is supposed to have undergone1 and in those latest changes which we trace in society and the products of social life4 ,nor is it only that in the development of a planet1 of an organism1 of a society1 of a science1 of an art1 the process of integration is seen in a more complete aggregation of each whole and of its constituent parts2 but it is also shown in an increasing mutual dependence of the parts4 ,dimly foreshadowed as this mutual dependence is among inorganic phenomena1 both celestial and terrestrial1 it becomes distinct among organic phenomena4 ,from the lowest living forms upwards1 the degree of development is marked by the degree in which the several parts constitute a mutually-dependent whole4 ,the advance from those creatures which live on in each part when cut in pieces1 up to those creatures which cannot lose any considerable part without death1 nor any inconsiderable part without great constitutional disturbance1 is clearly an advance to creatures which are not only more integrated in respect of their solidification1 but are also more integrated as consisting of organs that live for and by each other4 ,the like contrast between undeveloped and developed societies1 need not be shown in detail3 the ever-increasing co-ordination of parts1 is conspicuous to all4 ,and it must suffice just to indicate that the same thing holds true of social products3 as1 for instance1 of ,science2 which has become highly integrated not only in the sense that each division is made up of mutually-dependent propositions1 but also in the sense that the several divisions are mutually-dependent--cannot carry on their respective investigations without aid from each other4 ,it seems proper to remark that the generalization here variously illustrated1 is akin to one enunciated by ,schelling1 that ,life is the tendency to individuation4 ,struck by the fact that an aggregative process is traceable throughout nature1 from the growth of a crystal up to the development of a man2 and by the fact that the wholes resulting from this process1 completer in organic than in inorganic bodies1 are completest where the vital manifestations are the highest2 ,schelling concluded that this characteristic was the essential one4 ,according to him1 the formation of individual bodies is not incident to ,life1 but is that in which ,life fundamentally consists4 ,this position is1 for several reasons1 untenable4 ,in the first place1 it requires the conception of ,life to be extended so as to embrace inorganic phenomena2 since in crystallization1 and even in the formation of amorphous masses of matter1 this tendency to individuation is displayed4 ,schelling1 fully perceiving this1 did indeed accept the implication2 and held that inorganic bodies had life lower only in degree than that of organic bodies--their degree of life being measured by their degree of individuation4 ,this bold assumption1 which ,schelling evidently made to save his definition1 is inadmissible4 ,rational philosophy cannot ignore those broad distinctions which the general sense of mankind has established4 ,if it transcends them1 it must at the same time show what is their origin2 how far only they are valid2 and why they disappear from a higher point of view4 ,note next that the more complete individuality which ,schelling pointed out as characterizing bodies having the greatest amount of life1 is only one of their structural traits4 ,the greater degree of heterogeneity which they exhibit1 is1 as we have seen1 a much more conspicuous peculiarity2 and though it might possibly be contended that greater heterogeneity is remotely implied by greater individuality1 it must be admitted that in defining ,life as the tendency to individuation1 no hint is given that the bodies which live most are the most heterogeneous bodies4 ,moreover it is to be remarked that this definition of ,schelling1 refers much more to the structures of living bodies than to the processes which constitute ,life4 ,not ,life1 but the invariable accompaniment of ,life1 is that which his formula alone expresses4 ,the formation of a completer organic whole1 a more fully individuated body1 is truly a necessary concomitant of a higher life2 and the development of a higher life must therefore be accompanied by a tendency to greater individuation4 ,but to represent this tendency as ,life itself1 is to mistake an incidental result for an original cause4 ,life1 properly so called1 consists of multiform changes united together in various ways2 and is not expressed either by an anatomical description of the organism which manifests it1 or by a history of the modifications through which such organism has reached its present structure4 ,yet it is only in such description and such history that the tendency to individuation is seen4 ,lastly1 this definition which ,schelling gave of ,life is untenable1 not only because it refers rather to the organism than to the actions going on in it2 but also because it wholly ignores that connexion between the organism and the external world1 on which ,life depends4 ,all organic processes1 physical and psychial1 having for their object the maintenance of certain relations with environing agencies and objects2 it is impossible that there should be a true definition of ,life1 in which the environment is not named4 ,nevertheless1 ,schelling's conception was not a baseless one4 ,though not a truth1 it was yet the adumbration of a truth4 ,in defining ,life as the tendency to individuation1 he had in view that formation of a more compact1 complete1 and mutually-dependent whole1 which1 as we have seen1 is one characteristic of ,evolution in general4 ,his error was1 firstly1 in regarding it as a characteristic of ,life1 instead of a characteristic of living bodies1 displayed1 though in a less degree1 by other bodies2 and1 secondly1 in regarding it as the sole characteristic of such bodies4 ,it remains only to add1 that for expressing this aspect of the process of ,evolution1 the word integration is for several reasons preferable to the word individuation4 ,integration is the true antithesis of differentiation2 it has not that tacit reference to living bodies which the word individuation cannot be wholly freed from2 it expresses the aggregative tendency not only as displayed in the formation of more complete wholes1 but also as displayed in the consolidation of the several parts of which such wholes are made up2 and it has not the remotest teleological implication4 ,in short1 it simply formulates in the most abstract manner1 a wide induction untainted by any hypothesis4 99 99 99 99 99 #eg4 ,thus we find that to complete the definition arrived at in the last chapter1 much has to be added4 ,what was there alleged is true2 but it is not the whole truth4 ,evolution is unquestionably a change from a homogeneous state to a heterogeneous state2 but1 as we have seen1 there are some advances in heterogeneity which cannot be included in the idea of ,evolution4 ,this undue width of the definition1 implies the omission of some further peculiarity by which ,evolution is distinguished2 and this peculiarity we find to be that the more highly developed things become1 the more definite they become4 ,advance from the indefinite to the definite1 is as constantly and variously displayed as advance from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous4 ,and we are thus obliged to regard it as an essential characteristic of ,evolution4 ,further analysis1 however1 shows us that this increase of definiteness is not an independent process2 but is rather the necessary concomitant of another process4 ,a very little consideration of the facts proves that a change from the indefinite to the definite1 can arise only through a completer consolidation of the respective parts1 and of the whole which they constitute4 ,and so we find that while ,evolution is a transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous1 and of the indefinite into the definite1 it is also a transformation of the incoherent into the coherent4 ,along with the differentiation shown in increasing contrasts of parts with each other1 there goes on an integration1 by which the parts are rendered distinct units1 as well as closely united components of one whole4 ,these clauses here added to the definition1 are essential ones2 not only as being needful to distinguish ,evolution from that which is not ,evolution1 but likewise as being needful to express all which the idea of ,evolution includes4 ,progressive integration with the growing definiteness necessarily resulting from it1 is of co-ordinate importance with the progressive differentiation before dwelt upon--nay1 from one point of view1 may be held of greater importance4 ,for organization1 in which what we call ,evolution is most clearly and variously displayed1 consists even more in the union of many parts into one whole1 than in the formation of many parts4 ,the ,evolution which we see throughout inorganic nature1 is lower than that which organic nature exhibits to us1 for the especial reason that the mutual dependence of parts is extremely indefinite1 even when traceable at all4 ,in an amorphous mass of matter1 you may act mechanically or chemically upon one part without appreciably affecting the other parts4 ,though their electrical or thermal states may be for the moment altered1 their original states are soon resumed4 ,even in the highest inorganic aggregation--a crystal--the apex may be broken off and leave the rest intact3 the only clear evidence of mutual dependence of parts1 being1 the ability of the crystal to regenerate its apex if replaced in the solution from which it was formed4 ,but the constituent parts of organic bodies can severally maintain their existing states1 only while remaining in connexion4 ,even in the lowest living forms1 mutilation cannot be carried beyond a certain point without decomposition ensuing4 ,as we advance through the higher up to the highest forms1 we see a gradual narrowing of the limits within which the mutilation does not cause destruction3 a progressive increase of mutual dependence or integration which is1 at the same time1 the condition to greater functional perfection4 ,in societies this truth is equally manifest4 ,that the component units slowly segregate into groups of different ranks and occupations1 is a fact scarcely more conspicuous than is the fact that these groups are necessary to each other's existence4 ,and we cannot contemplate the still-progressing division of labour1 without seeing that the interdependence becomes ever greater as the evolution becomes higher4 ,it remains only to point out definitely1 what has been already implied1 that these several forms of change which have been successively described as making up the process of ,evolution1 are not in reality separate forms of change1 but different aspects of the same change4 ,intrinsically the transformation is one and indivisible4 ,the establishment of differences that become gradually more decided1 is evidently but the beginning of an action which cannot be pushed to its extreme without producing definite divisions between the parts1 and reducing each part to a separate mass4 ,but with our limited faculties1 it is not possible to take in the entire process at one view2 nor have we any single terms by which the process can be described4 ,hence we are obliged to contemplate each of its aspects separately1 and to find a separate expression for its characteristic4 ,having done this1 we are now in a position to frame a true idea of ,evolution4 ,combining these partial definitions we get a complete definition1 which may be most conveniently expressed thus--,evolution is a change from an indefinite1 incoherent homogeneity1 to a definite1 coherent heterogeneity2 through continuous differentiations and integrations4 ,it may perhaps be remarked that the last of these clauses is superfluous2 since the differentiation and integration are implied in the first clause4 ,this is true3 the transition which the first clause specifies1 is impossible save through the process specified in the second4 ,nevertheless1 a mere statement of the two extreme stages with which ,evolution begins and ends1 omitting all reference to changes connecting them1 leaves the mind with but an incomplete idea4 ,the idea becomes much more concrete when these changes are described4 ,hence1 though not logically necessary1 the second clause of the definition is practically desirable4 ,before closing the chapter1 a few words must be added respecting certain other modes of describing ,evolution4 ,organic bodies1 from the changes of which the idea of ,evolution has arisen1 and to the changes of which alone it is usually applied1 are often said to progress from simplicity to complexity4 ,the transformation of the simple into the complex1 and of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous1 are used as equivalent phrases2 or1 if any difference is recognized between them1 it is to the advantage of the first1 which is held to be the more specific4 ,after what has been said1 however1 it must be obvious that ,evolution cannot be thus adequately formulated4 ,no hint is given of that increased definiteness which we have found to be a concomitant of development4 ,nor is there anything implying the greater mutual dependence of parts4 ,nevertheless1 the brevity of the expression gives it a value for ordinary purposes2 and ,i shall probably hereafter frequently use it1 both in those cases where more precise language is not demanded1 and in those cases where it indicates the particular aspect of ,evolution referred to4 ,another description frequently given of ,evolution1 is1 that it is a change from the general to the special4 ,the more or less spherical germ from which every organism1 animal and vegetal1 proceeds1 is comparatively general3 alike in the sense that in appearance and chemical nature it is very similar to all other germs2 and also in the sense that its form is less markedly distinguished from the average forms of objects at large1 than is that of the mature organism--a contrast which equally holds of internal structure4 ,but this progress from the more general to the more special1 is rather a derivative than an original characteristic4 ,an increase of speciality being really an increase in the number of attributes--an addition of traits not possessed by bodies that are in other respects similar--is a necessary result of multiplying differentiations4 ,in other words1 general and special are subjective or ideal distinctions involved in our conceptions of classes1 rather than objective or real distinctions presented in the bodies classified4 ,nevertheless1 this abstract formula is not without its use4 ,it expresses a fact of much significance2 and one which we shall have constantly to refer to when dealing with the relations between organic bodies and their surrounding conditions4 ,the law of ,evolution however1 be it expressed in full as above1 or in these shorter but less specific phrases1 is essentially that which has been exhibited in detail throughout the foregoing pages4 ,so far as we can ascertain1 this law is universal4 ,it is illustrated with endless repetition1 and in countless ways1 wherever the facts are abundant2 and where the facts do not suffice for induction1 deduction goes far to supply its place4 ,among all orders of phenomena that lie within the sphere of observation1 we see ever going on the process of change above defined2 and many significant indications warrant us in believing1 that the same process of change went on throughout that remote past which lies beyond the sphere of observation4 ,if we must form any conclusion respecting the general course of things1 past1 present1 and future1 the one which the evidence as far as it goes justifies1 and the only one for which there is any justification1 is1 that the change from an indeterminate uniformity to a determinate multiformity which we everywhere see going on1 has been going on from the first1 and will continue to go on4 ----- ,footnote #aj3 ,carpenter's ,prin4 of ,comp4 ,phys41 p4 #fag4 ,,chapter ,,iv4 ,,the ,,causes ,,of ,,evolution4 #eh4 ,is this law ultimate or derivative8 ,must we rest satisfied with the conclusion that throughout all classes of concrete phenomena such is the mode of evolution8 ,or is it possible for us to ascertain why such is the mode of evolution8 ,may we seek for some all-pervading principle which underlies this all-pervading process8 ,can we by a further step reduce our empirical generalization to a rational generalization8 ,manifestly this community of result implies community of causation4 ,it may be that of such causation no account can be given1 further than that the ,unknowable is manifested to us after this manner4 ,or1 it may be1 that the mode of manifestation is reducible to simpler ones1 from which these many complex consequences follow4 ,analogy suggests the latter inference4 ,at present1 the conclusion that every kind of ,evolution is from a state of indefinite incoherent homogeneity to a state of definite coherent heterogeneity1 stands in the same position as did the once ultimate conclusion that every kind of organized body undergoes1 when dead1 a more or less rapid decay4 ,and as1 for the various kinds of decomposition through which animal and vegetal products pass1 we have now discovered a rationale in the chemical affinities of their constituent elements2 so1 possibly1 this universal transformation of the simple into the complex may be affiliated upon certain simple primordial principles4 ,such cause or causes of ,evolution1 may be sought for without in the least assuming that the ultimate mystery can be fathomed4 ,fully conscious that an absolute solution is for ever beyond us1 we may still look for a relative solution--may try to reduce the problem to its lowest terms4 ,just as it was possible to interpret ,kepler's laws as necessary consequences of the law of gravitation1 and then to admit that gravitation transcends analysis2 so it may be possible to interpret the law of ,evolution as the necessary consequence of some deeper law1 beyond which we may nevertheless be unable to go4 99 99 99 99 99 #ei4 ,the probability of common causation1 and the possibility of formulating it1 being granted1 it will be well before going further1 to consider what must be the general characteristics of such causation1 and in what direction we ought to look for it4 ,we can with certainty predict that be it simple or compound1 the cause has a high degree of generality2 seeing that it is common to such infinitely varied phenomena3 in proportion to the universality of its application must be the abstractness of its character4 ,whatever be the agency and the conditions under which it acts1 we need not expect to see in them an obvious explanation of this or that species of ,evolution1 because they equally underlie species of ,evolution of quite a different order4 ,determining ,evolution of every kind--astronomic1 geologic1 organic1 ethnologic1 social1 economic1 artistic1 c4--they must be concerned with something common to all these2 and to see what these possess in common1 will therefore be the best method of guiding ourselves towards the desired solution4 ,the only obvious respect in which all kinds of ,evolution are alike1 is1 that they are modes of change4 ,every phenomenon to which we apply the term1 presents us with a succession of states2 and when such succession ceases1 we no longer predicate ,evolution4 ,equally in those past forms of it which are more or less hypothetical1 and in those forms of it which we see going on around1 this is the common characteristic4 ,note next1 that the kind of change which constitutes ,evolution1 is broadly distinguished from change of an equally general kind1 in this1 that it is change of internal relations instead of change of external relations4 ,all things in motion through space are the subjects of change2 but while in this which we call mechanical motion1 the relative position as measured from surrounding objects is continually altered1 there is not implied any alteration in the positions of the parts of the moving body in respect to each other4 ,conversely1 a body exhibiting what we call ,evolution1 while it either may or may not display new relations of position to the things around it1 must display new relations of position among the parts of which it is made up4 ,thus we narrow the field of inquiry by recognizing the change in which ,evolution consists1 as a change in the arrangement of parts3 of course using the word parts in its most extended sense1 as signifying both ultimate units and masses of such units4 ,further1 we have to remember that this change in the arrangement of parts which constitutes ,evolution1 is a certain order of such change4 ,as we saw in the last chapter1 there is a change in the arrangement of parts which is not ,evolution but ,dissolution--a destructive change as opposed to a constructive change--a change by which the definite is gradually rendered indefinite1 the coherent slowly becomes incoherent1 and the heterogeneous eventually lapses into comparative homogeneity4 ,thus then we reduce that which we have to investigate to its most abstract shape4 ,our task is to find the cause or causes of a certain order of change that takes place in the arrangement of parts4 99 99 99 99 99 #fj4 ,evidently the problem1 as thus expressed1 brings us face to face with the ultimate elements of phenomena in general4 ,it is impossible to account for a certain change in the arrangement of the parts of any mass1 without involving--first1 the matter which makes up the parts thus re-arranged2 next1 the motion exhibited during the re-arrangement2 and then1 the force producing this motion4 ,the problem is a dynamical one2 and there can be no truly scientific solution of it1 save one given in terms of ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force--terms in which all other dynamical problems are expressed and solved4 ,the proposal thus to study the question from a purely physical point of view1 will most likely1 notwithstanding what has been said in the first part of this work1 raise in some minds either alarm or prejudice4 ,having1 throughout life1 constantly heard the charge of materialism made against those who ascribed the more involved phenomena to agencies like those seen in the simplest phenomena1 most persons have acquired a repugnance to such methods of interpretation2 and when it is proposed to apply them universally1 even though it is premised that the solution they give can be but relative1 more or less of the habitual feeling will probably arise4 ,such an attitude of mind1 however1 is significant1 not so much of a reverence for the ,unknown ,cause1 as of an irreverence for those omnipresent forms in which the ,unknown ,cause is manifested to us4 ,men who have not risen above that vulgar conception which unites with ,matter the contemptuous epithets 8gross0 and 8brute10 may naturally enough feel dismay at the proposal to reduce the phenomena of ,life1 of ,mind1 and of ,society1 to a level with those which they think so degraded4 ,but whoever remembers that the forms of existence which the uncultivated speak of with so much scorn1 are not only shown by the man of science to be the more marvellous in their attributes the more they are investigated1 but are also proved to be in their ultimate nature absolutely incomprehensible--as absolutely incomprehensible as sensation1 or the conscious something which perceives it--whoever fully realizes this truth1 ,i say1 will see that the course proposed does not imply a degradation of the so-called higher1 but an elevation of the so-called lower4 ,perceiving1 as he will1 that the ,materialist and ,spiritualist controversy is a mere war of words1 in which the disputants are equally absurd--each thinking he understands that which it is impossible for any man to understand--he will perceive how utterly groundless is the fear referred to4 ,being fully convinced that whatever nomenclature is used1 the ultimate mystery must remain the same1 he will be as ready to formulate all phenomena in terms of ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force1 as in any other terms2 and will rather indeed anticipate1 that only in a doctrine which recognizes the ,unknown ,cause as co-extensive with all orders of phenomena1 can there be a consistent ,religion1 or a consistent ,science4 ,on the other hand1 the conclusion that ,evolution1 considered under its most abstract form1 is a certain change in the arrangement of parts2 and that the causes of this change can be expressed only in terms of ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force2 may in critical minds raise the question--,what are ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force8 ,referring back in thought to the reasonings contained in the chapter on 8,ultimate ,scientific ,ideas20 and remembering how it was there shown that absolute knowledge of ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force1 is impossible2 some readers will perhaps conclude that any such interpretation as the one above proposed1 must be visionary4 ,it may be asked--,how can a comprehensible account of ,evolution be given in terms that are themselves incomprehensible8 ,before proceeding1 this question must be met4 ,there can be no sound philosophy without clearly defined terms2 and as1 on the meanings of the terms to be here used1 doubts have probably been cast by the reasonings contained in the chapter referred to1 such doubts must be removed4 ,if1 as was shown1 our ideas of things do not correspond with things in themselves1 it becomes necessary to inquire in what way they are to be accepted4 ,if they are not absolutely true1 then what is the exact meaning of the assertion that they are relatively true8 ,to this question let us now address ourselves4 ,,chapter ,v4 ,,space1 ,,time1 ,,matter1 ,,motion1 ,,and ,,force4 #fa4 ,that sceptical state of mind which the criticisms of ,philosophy usually produce1 is1 in great measure1 caused by the misinterpretation of words4 ,a sense of universal illusion ordinarily follows the reading of metaphysics2 and is strong in proportion as the argument has appeared conclusive4 ,this sense of universal illusion would probably never have arisen1 had the terms used been always rightly construed4 ,unfortunately1 these terms have by association acquired meanings that are quite different from those given to them in philosophical discussions2 and the ordinary meanings being unavoidably suggested1 there results more or less of that dreamlike idealism which is so incongruous with our instinctive convictions4 ,the word phenomenon and its equivalent word appearance1 are in great part to blame for this4 ,in ordinary speech1 these are uniformly employed in reference to visual perceptions4 ,habit1 almost1 if not quite1 disables us from thinking of appearance except as something seen2 and though phenomenon has a more generalized meaning1 yet we cannot rid it of associations with appearance1 which is its verbal equivalent4 ,when1 therefore1 ,philosophy proves that our knowledge of the external world can be but phenomenal--when it concludes that the things of which we are conscious are appearances2 it inevitably arouses in us the notion of an illusiveness like that to which our visual perceptions are so liable in comparison with our tactual perceptions4 ,good pictures show us that the aspects of things may be very nearly simulated by colours on canvass4 ,the looking-glass still more distinctly proves how deceptive is sight when unverified by touch4 ,and the frequent cases in which we misinterpret the impressions made on our eyes1 and think we see something which we do not see1 further shake our faith in vision4 ,so that the implication of uncertainty has infected the very word appearance4 ,hence1 ,philosophy1 by giving it an extended meaning1 leads us to think of all our senses as deceiving us in the same way that the eyes do2 and so makes us feel ourselves floating in a world of phantasms4 ,had phenomenon and appearance no such misleading associations1 little1 if any1 of this mental confusion would result4 ,or did we in place of them use the term effect1 which is equally applicable to all impressions produced on consciousness through any of the senses1 and which carries with it in thought the necessary correlative cause1 with which it is equally real1 we should be in little danger of falling into the insanities of idealism4 ,such danger as there might still remain1 would disappear on making a further verbal correction4 ,at present1 the confusion resulting from the above misinterpretation1 is made greater by an antithetical misinterpretation4 ,we increase the seeming unreality of that phenomenal existence which we can alone know1 by contrasting it with a noumenal existence which we imagine would1 if we could know it1 be more truly real to us4 ,but we delude ourselves with a verbal fiction4 ,what is the meaning of the word real8 ,this is the question which underlies every metaphysical inquiry2 and the neglect of it is the remaining cause of the chronic antagonisms of metaphysicians4 ,in the interpretation put on the word real1 the discussions of philosophy retain one element of the vulgar conception of things1 while they reject all its other elements2 and create confusion by the inconsistency4 ,the peasant1 on contemplating an object1 does not regard that which he contemplates as something in himself1 but believes the thing of which he is conscious to be the external object--imagines that his consciousness extends to the very place where the object lies3 to him the appearance and the reality are one and the same thing4 ,the metaphysician1 however1 is convinced that consciousness cannot embrace the reality1 but only the appearance of it2 and so he transfers the appearance into consciousness and leaves the reality outside4 ,this reality left outside of consciousness1 he continues to think of much in the same way as the ignorant man thinks of the appearance4 ,though the reality is asserted to be out of consciousness1 yet the realness ascribed to it is constantly spoken of as though it were a knowledge possessed apart from consciousness4 ,it seems to be forgotten that the conception of reality can be nothing more than some mode of consciousness2 and that the question to be considered is--,what is the relation between this mode and other modes8 ,by reality we mean persistence in consciousness3 a persistence that is either unconditional1 as our consciousness of space1 or that is conditional1 as our consciousness of a body while grasping it4 ,the real1 as we conceive it1 is distinguished solely by the test of persistence2 for by this test we separate it from what we call the unreal4 ,between a person standing before us1 and the idea of such a person1 we discriminate by our ability to expel the idea from consciousness1 and our inability1 while looking at him1 to expel the person from consciousness4 ,and when in doubt as to the validity or illusiveness of some impression made upon us in the dusk1 we settle the matter by observing whether the impression persists on closer observation2 and we predicate reality if the persistence is complete4 ,how truly persistence is what we mean by reality1 is shown in the fact that when1 after criticism has proved that the real as we are conscious of it is not the objectively real1 the indefinite notion which we form of the objectively real1 is of something which persists absolutely1 under all changes of mode1 form1 or appearance4 ,and the fact that we cannot form even an indefinite notion of the absolutely real1 except as the absolutely persistent1 clearly implies that persistence is our ultimate test of the real as present to consciousness4 ,reality then1 as we think it1 being nothing more than persistence in consciousness1 the result must be the same to us whether that which we perceive be the ,unconditioned itself1 or an effect invariably wrought on us by the ,unconditioned4 ,if some mode of the ,unconditioned uniformly produces some mode of consciousness--if the mode of consciousness so produced1 is as persistent as would be such mode of the ,unconditioned were it immediately known2 it follows that the reality will be to our consciousness as complete in the one case as in the other4 ,were the ,unconditioned itself present in thought1 it could but be persistent2 and if instead of it1 there is present its persistent effect1 the resulting consciousness of reality must be exactly the same4 ,hence there may be drawn these conclusions3--,first1 that we have an indefinite consciousness of an absolute reality transcending relations1 which is produced by the absolute persistence in us of something which survives all changes of relation4 ,second1 that we have a definite consciousness of relative reality1 which unceasingly persists in us under one or other of its forms1 and under each form so long as the conditions of presentation are fulfilled2 and that the relative reality1 being thus continuously persistent in us1 is as real to us as would be the absolute reality could it be immediately known4 ,third1 that thought being possible only under relation1 the relative reality can be conceived as such only in connexion with an absolute reality2 and the connexion between the two being absolutely persistent in our consciousness1 is real in the same sense as the terms it unites are real4 ,thus then we may resume1 with entire confidence1 those realistic conceptions which philosophy at first sight seems to dissipate4 ,though reality under the forms of our consciousness1 is but a conditioned effect of the absolute reality1 yet this conditioned effect standing in indissoluble relation with its unconditioned cause1 and being equally persistent with it so long as the conditions persist1 is1 to the consciousness supplying those conditions1 equally real4 ,the persistent impressions being the persistent results of a persistent cause1 are for practical purposes the same to us as the cause itself2 and may be habitually dealt with as its equivalents4 ,somewhat in the same way that our visual perceptions1 though merely symbols found to be the equivalents of tactual perceptions1 are yet so identified with those tactual perceptions that we actually appear to see the solidity and hardness which we do but infer1 and thus conceive as objects what are only the signs of objects2 so1 on a higher stage1 do we deal with these relative realities as though they were absolutes instead of effects of the absolute4 ,and we may legitimately continue so to deal with them as long as the conclusions to which they help us are understood as relative realities and not absolute ones4 ,this general conclusion it now remains to interpret specifically1 in its application to each of our ultimate scientific ideas4 99 99 99 99 99 #fb4aa ,we think in relations4 ,this is truly the form of all thought2 and if there are any other forms1 they must be derived from this4 ,we have seen 7,chap4 iii4 ,part ,i47 that the several ultimate modes of being cannot be known or conceived as they exist in themselves2 that is1 out of relation to our consciousness4 ,we have seen1 by analyzing the product of thought1 7 #bc17 that it always consists of relations2 and cannot include anything beyond the most general of these4 ,on analyzing the process of thought1 we found that cognition of the ,absolute was impossible1 because it presented neither relation1 nor its elements--difference and likeness4 ,further1 we found that not only ,intelligence but ,life itself1 consists in the establishment of internal relations in correspondence with external relations4 ,and lastly1 it was shown that though by the relativity of our thought we are eternally debarred from knowing or conceiving ,absolute ,being2 yet that this very relativity of our thought1 necessitates that vague consciousness of ,absolute ,being which no mental effort can suppress4 ,that relation is the universal form of thought1 is thus a truth which all kinds of demonstration unite in proving4 ,by the transcendentalists1 certain other phenomena of consciousness are regarded as forms of thought4 ,presuming that relation would be admitted by them to be a universal mental form1 they would class with it two others as also universal4 ,were their hypothesis otherwise tenable however1 it must still be rejected if such alleged further forms are interpretable as generated by the primary form4 ,if we think in relations1 and if relations have certain universal forms1 it is manifest that such universal forms of relations will become universal forms of our consciousness4 ,and if these further universal forms are thus explicable1 it is superfluous1 and therefore unphilosophical1 to assign them an independent origin4 ,now relations are of two orders--relations of sequence1 and relations of co-existence2 of which the one is original and the other derivative4 ,the relation of sequence is given in every change of consciousness4 ,the relation of co-existence1 which cannot be originally given in a consciousness of which the states are serial1 becomes distinguished only when it is found that certain relations of sequence have their terms presented in consciousness in either order with equal facility2 while the others are presented only in one order4 ,relations of which the terms are not reversible1 become recognized as sequences proper2 while relations of which the terms occur indifferently in both directions1 become recognized as co-existences4 ,endless experiences1 which from moment to moment present both orders of these relations1 render the distinction between them perfectly definite2 and at the same time generate an abstract conception of each4 ,the abstract of all sequences is ,time4 ,the abstract of all co-existences is ,space4 ,from the fact that in thought1 ,time is inseparable from sequence1 and ,space from co-existence1 we do not here infer that ,time and ,space are original conditions of consciousness under which sequences and co-existences are known2 but we infer that our conceptions of ,time and ,space are generated1 as other abstracts are generated from other concretes3 the only difference being1 that the organization of experiences has1 in these cases1 been going on throughout the entire evolution of intelligence4 ,this synthesis is confirmed by analysis4 ,our consciousness of ,space is a consciousness of co-existent positions4 ,any limited portion of space can be conceived only by representing its limits as co-existing in certain relative positions2 and each of its imagined boundaries1 be it line or plane1 can be thought of in no other way than as made up of co-existent positions in close proximity4 ,and since a position is not an entity--since the congeries of positions which constitute any conceived portion of space1 and mark its bounds1 are not sensible existences2 it follows that the co-existent positions which make up our consciousness of ,space1 are not co-existences in the full sense of the word 7which implies realities as their terms71 but are the blank forms of co-existences1 left behind when the realities are absent2 that is1 are the abstracts of co-existences4 ,the experiences out of which1 during the evolution of intelligence1 this abstract of all co-existences has been generated1 are experiences of individual positions as ascertained by touch2 and each of such experiences involves the resistance of an object touched1 and the muscular tension which measures this resistance4 ,by countless unlike muscular adjustments1 involving unlike muscular tensions1 different resisting positions are disclosed2 and these1 as they can be experienced in one order as readily as another1 we regard as co-existing4 ,but since1 under other circumstances1 the same muscular adjustments do not produce contact with resisting positions1 there result the same states of consciousness1 minus the resistances--blank forms of co-existence from which the co-existent objects before experienced are absent4 ,and from a building up of these1 too elaborate to be here detailed1 results that abstract of all relations of co-existence which we call ,space4 ,it remains only to point out1 as a thing which we must not forget1 that the experiences from which the consciousness of ,space arises1 are experiences of force4 ,a certain correlation of the muscular forces we ourselves exercise1 is the index of each position as originally disclosed to us2 and the resistance which makes us aware of something existing in that position1 is an equivalent of the pressure we consciously exert4 ,thus1 experiences of forces variously correlated1 are those from which our consciousness of ,space is abstracted4 ,that which we know as ,space being thus shown1 alike by its genesis and definition1 to be purely relative1 what are we to say of that which causes it8 ,is there an absolute ,space which relative ,space in some sort represents8 ,is ,space in itself a form or condition of absolute existence1 producing in our minds a corresponding form or condition of relative existence8 ,these are unanswerable questions4 ,our conception of ,space is produced by some mode of the ,unknowable2 and the complete unchangeableness of our conception of it simply implies a complete uniformity in the effects wrought by this mode of the ,unknowable upon us4 ,but therefore to call it a necessary mode of the ,unknowable1 is illegitimate4 ,all we can assert is1 that ,space is a relative reality2 that our consciousness of this unchanging relative reality implies an absolute reality equally unchanging in so far as we are concerned2 and that the relative reality may be unhesitatingly accepted in thought as a valid basis for our reasonings2 which1 when rightly carried on1 will bring us to truths that have a like relative reality--the only truths which concern us or can possibly be known to us4 ,concerning ,time1 relative and absolute1 a parallel argument leads to parallel conclusions4 ,these are too obvious to need specifying in detail4 99 99 99 99 99 #fc4 ,our conception of ,matter1 reduced to its simplest shape1 is that of co-existent positions that offer resistance2 as contrasted with our conception of ,space1 in which the co-existent positions offer no resistance4 ,we think of ,body as bounded by surfaces that resist2 and as made up throughout of parts that resist4 ,mentally abstract the co-existent resistances1 and the consciousness of ,body disappears2 leaving behind it the consciousness of ,space4 ,and since the group of co-existing resistent positions constituting a portion of matter1 is uniformly capable of giving us impressions of resistance in combination with various muscular adjustments1 according as we touch its near1 its remote1 its right1 or its left side2 it results that as different muscular adjustments habitually indicate different co-existences1 we are obliged to conceive every portion of matter as containing more than one resistent position--that is1 as occupying ,space4 ,hence the necessity we are under of representing to ourselves the ultimate elements of ,matter as being at once extended and resistent3 this being the universal form of our sensible experiences of ,matter1 becomes the form which our conception of it cannot transcend1 however minute the fragments which imaginary subdivisions produce4 ,of these two inseparable elements1 the resistance is primary1 and the extension secondary4 ,occupied extension1 or ,body1 being distinguished in consciousness from unoccupied extension1 or ,space1 by its resistance1 this attribute must clearly have precedence in the genesis of the idea4 ,such a conclusion is1 indeed1 an obvious corollary from that at which we arrived in the foregoing section4 ,if1 as was there contended1 our consciousness of ,space is a product of accumulated experiences1 partly our own but chiefly ancestral--if1 as was pointed out1 the experiences from which our consciousness of ,space is abstracted1 can be received only through impressions of resistance made upon the organism2 the necessary inference is1 that experiences of resistance being those from which the conception of ,space is generated1 the resistance-attribute of ,matter must be regarded as primordial and the space-attribute as derivative4 ,whence it becomes manifest that our experience of force1 is that out of which the idea of ,matter is built4 ,matter as opposing our muscular energies1 being immediately present to consciousness in terms of force2 and its occupancy of ,space being known by an abstract of experiences originally given in terms of force2 it follows that forces1 standing in certain correlations1 form the whole content of our idea of ,matter4 ,such being our cognition of the relative reality1 what are we to say of the absolute reality8 ,we can only say that it is some mode of the ,unknowable1 related to the ,matter we know1 as cause to effect4 ,the relativity of our cognition of ,matter is shown alike by the above analysis1 and by the contradictions which are evolved when we deal with the cognition as an absolute one 7 #af74 ,but1 as we have lately seen1 though known to us only under relation1 ,matter is as real in the true sense of that word1 as it would be could we know it out of relation2 and further1 the relative reality which we know as ,matter1 is necessarily represented to the mind as standing in a persistent or real relation to the absolute reality4 ,we may therefore deliver ourselves over without hesitation1 to those terms of thought which experience has organized in us4 ,we need not in our physical1 chemical1 or other researches1 refrain from dealing with ,matter as made up of extended and resistent atoms2 for this conception1 necessarily resulting from our experiences of ,matter1 is not less legitimate1 than the conception of aggregate masses as extended and resistent4 ,the atomic hypothesis1 as well as the kindred hypothesis of an all-pervading ether consisting of molecules1 is simply a necessary development of those universal forms which the actions of the ,unknowable have wrought in us4 ,the conclusions logically worked out by the aid of these hypotheses1 are sure to be in harmony with all others which these same forms involve1 and will have a relative truth that is equally complete4 99 99 99 99 99 #fd4 ,the conception of ,motion as presented or represented in the developed consciousness1 involves the conceptions of ,space1 of ,time1 and of ,matter4 ,a something that moves2 a series of positions occupied in succession2 and a group of co-existent positions united in thought with the successive ones--these are the constituents of the idea4 ,and since1 as we have seen1 these are severally elaborated from experiences of force as given in certain correlations1 it follows that from a further synthesis of such experiences1 the idea of ,motion is also elaborated4 ,a certain other element in the idea1 which is in truth its fundamental element1 7namely1 the necessity which the moving body is under to go on changing its position71 results immediately from the earliest experiences of force4 ,movements of different parts of the organism in relation to each other1 are the first presented in consciousness4 ,these1 produced by the action of the muscles1 necessitate reactions upon consciousness in the shape of sensations of muscular tension4 ,consequently1 each stretching-out or drawing-in of a limb1 is originally known as a series of muscular tensions1 varying in intensity as the position of the limb changes4 ,and this rudimentary consciousness of ,motion1 consisting of serial impressions of force1 becomes inseparably united with the consciousness of ,space and ,time as fast as these are abstracted from further impressions of force4 ,or rather1 out of this primitive conception of ,motion1 the adult conception of it is developed simultaneously with the development of the conceptions of ,space and ,time3 all three being evolved from the more multiplied and varied impressions of muscular tension and objective resistance4 ,motion1 as we know it1 is thus traceable1 in common with the other ultimate scientific ideas1 to experiences of force4 ,that this relative reality answers to some absolute reality1 it is needful only for form's sake to assert4 ,what has been said above1 respecting the ,unknown ,cause which produces in us the effects called ,matter1 ,space1 and ,time1 will apply1 on simply changing the terms1 to ,motion4 99 99 99 99 99 #fe4 ,we come down then finally to ,force1 as the ultimate of ultimates4 ,though ,space1 ,time1 ,matter1 and ,motion1 are apparently all necessary data of intelligence1 yet a psychological analysis 7here indicated only in rude outline7 shows us that these are either built up of1 or abstracted from1 experiences of ,force4 ,matter and ,motion1 as we know them1 are differently conditioned manifestations of ,force4 ,space and ,time1 as we know them1 are disclosed along with these different manifestations of ,force as the conditions under which they are presented4 ,matter and ,motion are concretes built up from the contents of various mental relations2 while ,space and ,time are abstracts of the forms of these various relations4 ,deeper down than these1 however1 are the primordial experiences of ,force1 which1 as occurring in consciousness in different combinations1 supply at once the materials whence the forms of relations are generalized1 and the related objects built up4 ,a single impression of force is manifestly receivable by a sentient being devoid of mental forms3 grant but sensibility1 with no established power of thought1 and a force producing some nervous change1 will still be presentable at the supposed seat of sensation4 ,though no single impression of force so received1 could itself produce consciousness 7which implies relations between different states71 yet a multiplication of such impressions1 differing in kind and degree1 would give the materials for the establishment of relations1 that is1 of thought4 ,and if such relations differed in their forms as well as in their contents1 the impressions of such forms would be organized simultaneously with the impressions they contained4 ,thus all other modes of consciousness are derivable from experiences of ,force2 but experiences of ,force are not derivable from anything else4 ,indeed1 it needs but to remember that consciousness consists of changes1 to see that the ultimate datum of consciousness must be that of which change is the manifestation2 and that thus the force by which we ourselves produce changes1 and which serves to symbolize the cause of changes in general1 is the final disclosure of analysis4 ,it is a truism to say that the nature of this undecomposable element of our knowledge is inscrutable4 ,if1 to use an algebraic illustration1 we represent ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force1 by the symbols x1 y1 and z2 then1 we may ascertain the values of x and y in terms of z2 but the value of z can never be found3 z is the unknown quantity which must for ever remain unknown2 for the obvious reason that there is nothing in which its value can be expressed4 ,it is within the possible reach of our intelligence to go on simplifying the equations of all phenomena1 until the complex symbols which formulate them are reduced to certain functions of this ultimate symbol2 but when we have done this1 we have reached that limit which eternally divides science from nescience4 ,that this undecomposable mode of consciousness into which all other modes may be decomposed1 cannot be itself the ,power manifested to us through phenomena1 has been already proved 7 #ah74 ,we saw that to assume an identity of nature between the cause of changes as it absolutely exists1 and that cause of change of which we are conscious in our own muscular efforts1 betrays us into alternative impossibilities of thought4 ,force1 as we know it1 can be regarded only as a certain conditioned effect of the ,unconditioned ,cause--as the relative reality indicating to us an ,absolute ,reality by which it is immediately produced4 ,and here1 indeed1 we see even more clearly than before1 how inevitable is that transfigured realism to which sceptical criticism finally brings us round4 ,getting rid of all complications1 and contemplating pure ,force1 we are irresistibly compelled by the relativity of our thought1 to vaguely conceive some unknown force as the correlative of the known force4 ,conditioned effect and unconditioned cause1 are here presented in their primordial relation as two sides of the same change2 of which we are obliged to regard the conditioned and the unconditioned sides as equally real3 the only difference being that the reality of the one is made relative by the imposition of the forms and limits of our consciousness1 while the reality of the other1 in the absence of those forms and limits1 remains absolute4 ,thus much respecting the nature of our ultimate scientific ideas4 ,before proceeding to our general inquiry concerning the causes of ,evolution1 we have still to consider certain ultimate scientific truths4 ----- ,footnote #aa3 ,for the psychological conclusions briefly set forth in this and the three sections following it1 the justification will be found in the writer's ,principles of ,psychology4 ,,chapter ,,vi4 ,,the ,,indestructibility ,,of ,,matter4 #ff4 ,not because the truth is unfamiliar1 is it needful here to say something concerning the indestructibility of ,matter2 but partly because the symmetry of our argument demands the enunciation of this truth1 and partly because the evidence on which it is accepted requires examination4 ,could it be shown1 or could it with any rationality be even supposed1 that ,matter1 either in its aggregates or in its units1 ever became non-existent1 there would be an end to the inquiry on which we are now setting out4 ,evolution1 considered as a re-arrangement of parts1 could not be scientifically explained1 if1 during its course1 any of the parts might arise out of nothing or might lapse into nothing4 ,the question would no longer be one comprehending only the forces and motions by which the re-arrangement is effected2 but would involve an incalculable element1 and would hence be insoluble4 ,clearly1 therefore1 the indestructibility of ,matter is an indispensable axiom4 ,so far from being admitted as a self-evident truth1 this would1 in primitive times1 have been rejected as a self-evident error4 ,there was once universally current1 a notion that things could vanish into absolute nothing1 or arise out of absolute nothing4 ,if we analyze early superstitions1 or that faith in magic which was general in later times and even still survives among the uncultured1 we find one of its postulates to be1 that by some potent spell ,matter can be called out of nonentity1 and can be made non-existent4 ,if men did not believe this in the strict sense of the word 7which would imply that the process of creation or annihilation was clearly represented in consciousness71 they still believed that they believed it2 and how nearly1 in their confused thoughts1 the one was equivalent to the other1 is shown by their conduct4 ,nor1 indeed1 have dark ages and inferior minds alone betrayed this belief4 ,the current theology1 in its teachings respecting the beginning and end of the world1 is clearly pervaded by it2 and it may be even questioned whether ,shakespeare1 in his poetical anticipation of a time when all things should disappear and 8leave not a wrack behind10 was not under its influence4 ,the gradual accumulation of experiences however1 and still more the organization of experiences1 has tended slowly to reverse this conviction2 until now1 the doctrine that ,matter is indestructible has become a common-place4 ,whatever may be true of it absolutely1 we have learnt that relatively to our consciousness1 ,matter never either comes into existence or ceases to exist4 ,cases which once gave an apparent support to the illusion that something could come out of nothing1 a wider knowledge has one by one cancelled4 ,the comet that is all at once discovered in the heavens and nightly waxes larger1 is proved not to be a newly-created body1 but a body that was until lately beyond the range of vision4 ,the cloud which in the course of a few minutes forms in the sky1 consists not of substance that has just begun to be1 but of substance that previously existed in a more diffused and transparent form4 ,and similarly with a crystal or precipitate in relation to the fluid depositing it4 ,conversely1 the seeming annihilations of ,matter turn out1 on closer observation1 to be only changes of state4 ,it is found that the evaporated water1 though it has become invisible1 may be brought by condensation to its original shape4 ,the discharged fowling-piece gives evidence that though the gunpowder has disappeared1 there have appeared in place of it certain gases1 which1 in assuming a larger volume1 have caused the explosion4 ,not1 however1 until the rise of quantitative chemistry1 could the conclusion suggested by such experiences be reduced to a certainty4 ,when1 having ascertained not only the combinations into which various substances enter1 but also the proportions in which they combine1 chemists were enabled to account for the matter that had made its appearance or become invisible1 the proof was rendered complete4 ,when1 in place of the candle that had slowly burnt away1 it was shown that certain calculable quantities of carbonic acid and water had resulted--when it was demonstrated that the joint weight of the carbonic acid and water thus produced1 was equal to the weight of the candle plus that of the oxygen uniting with its constituents during combustion2 it was put beyond doubt that the carbon and hydrogen forming the candle1 were still in existence1 and had simply changed their state4 ,and of the general conclusion thus exemplified1 the exact analyses daily made1 in which the same portion of matter is pursued through numerous transformations and finally separated1 furnish never-ceasing confirmations4 ,such has become the effect of this specific evidence1 joined to that general evidence which the continued existence of familiar objects unceasingly gives us2 that the indestructibility of ,matter is now recognized by many as a truth of which the negation is inconceivable4 ,habitual experiences being no longer met by any counter-experiences1 as they once seemed to be2 but these apparent counter-experiences furnishing new proof that ,matter exists permanently1 even where the senses fail to detect it2 it has grown into an axiom of science1 that whatever metamorphoses ,matter undergoes1 its quantity is fixed4 ,the chemist1 the physicist1 and the physiologist1 not only one and all take this for granted1 but would severally profess themselves unable to realize any supposition to the contrary4 99 99 99 99 99 #fg4 ,this last fact naturally raises the question1 whether we have any higher warrant for this fundamental belief1 than the warrant of conscious induction4 ,the indestructibility of ,matter is proved experimentally to be an absolute uniformity within the range of our experience4 ,but absolute uniformities of experience1 generate absolute uniformities of thought4 ,does it not follow1 then1 that this ultimate truth must be a cognition involved in our mental organization8 ,an affirmative answer we shall find unavoidable4 ,what is termed the ultimate incompressibility of ,matter1 is an admitted law of thought4 ,though it is possible to imagine a piece of matter to be compressed without limit1 yet however small the bulk to which we conceive it reduced1 it is impossible to conceive it reduced into nothing4 ,while we can represent to ourselves the parts of the matter as indefinitely approximated1 and the space occupied as indefinitely decreased1 we cannot represent to ourselves the quantity of matter as made less4 ,to do this would imply an imagined disappearance of some of the constituent parts--would imply that some of the constituent parts were in thought compressed into nothing2 which is no more possible than the compression of the whole into nothing4 ,whence it is an obvious corollary1 that the total quantity of matter in the ,universe1 cannot really be conceived as diminished1 any more than it can be conceived as increased4 ,our inability to conceive ,matter becoming non-existent1 is immediately consequent on the very nature of thought4 ,thought consists in the establishment of relations4 ,there can be no relation established1 and therefore no thought framed1 when one of the related terms is absent from consciousness4 ,hence it is impossible to think of something becoming nothing1 for the same reason that it is impossible to think of nothing becoming something--the reason1 namely1 that nothing cannot become an object of consciousness4 ,the annihilation of ,matter is unthinkable for the same reason that the creation of ,matter is unthinkable2 and its indestructibility thus becomes an priori cognition of the highest order--not one that results from a long continued registry of experiences gradually organized into an irreversible mode of thought2 but one that is given in the form of all experiences whatever4 ,doubtless it will be considered strange that a truth only in modern times accepted as unquestionable1 and then only by men of science1 should be classed as an priori truth2 not only of equal certainty with those commonly so classed1 but of even higher certainty4 ,to set down as a proposition which cannot be thought1 one which mankind once universally professed to think1 and which the great majority profess to think even now1 seems absurd4 ,the explanation is1 that in this1 as in countless other cases1 men have supposed themselves to think what they did not think4 ,as was shown at the outset1 the greater part of our conceptions are symbolic4 ,many of these symbolic conceptions1 though rarely developed into real ones1 admit of being so developed2 and1 being directly or indirectly proved to correspond with actualities1 are valid4 ,but along with these there pass current others which cannot be developed--cannot by any direct or indirect process be realized in thought2 much less proved to correspond with actualities4 ,not being habitually tested1 however1 the legitimate and illegitimate symbolic conceptions are confounded together2 and supposing themselves to have literally thought1 that which they have thought only symbolically1 men say they believe propositions of which the terms cannot even be put together in consciousness4 ,hence the ready acceptance given to sundry hypotheses respecting the origin of the ,universe1 which yet are absolutely unthinkable4 ,and as before we found the commonly asserted doctrine that ,matter was created out of nothing1 to have been never really conceived at all1 but to have been conceived only symbolically2 so here we find the annihilation of ,matter to have been conceived only symbolically1 and the symbolic conception mistaken for a real one4 ,possibly it will be objected that the words thought1 and belief1 and conception1 are here employed in new senses2 and that it is a misuse of language to say that men did not really think that which has nevertheless so profoundly influenced their conduct4 ,it must be confessed that there is an inconvenience in so restricting the meanings of these words4 ,there is no remedy however4 ,definite conclusions can be reached1 only by the use of well-defined terms4 ,questions touching the validity of any portion of our knowledge1 cannot be profitably discussed unless the words knowing1 and thinking1 have specific interpretations4 ,we must not include under them whatever confused processes of consciousness the popular speech applies them to2 but only the distinct processes of consciousness4 ,and if this obliges us to reject a large part of human thinking as not thinking at all1 but merely pseudo-thinking1 there is no help for it4 ,returning to the general question1 we find the results to be3--that we have positive experience of the continued existence of ,matter2 that the form of our thought renders it impossible for us to have experience of ,matter passing into non-existence1 since such experience would involve cognition of a relation having one of its terms not representable in consciousness2 that hence the indestructibility of ,matter is in strictness an priori truth2 that nevertheless1 certain illusive experiences1 suggesting the notion of its annihilation1 have produced in undisciplined minds not only the supposition that ,matter could be conceived to become non-existent1 but the notion that it did so2 but that careful observation1 showing the supposed annihilations to have never taken place1 has confirmed1 posteriori1 the priori cognition which ,psychology shows to result from a uniformity of experience that can never be met by counter-experience4 99 99 99 99 99 #fh4 ,the fact1 however1 which it most concerns us here to observe1 is1 the nature of the perceptions by which the permanence of ,matter is perpetually illustrated to us1 and from which ,science draws the inference that ,matter is indestructible4 ,these perceptions1 under all their forms1 amount simply to this--that the force which a given quantity of matter exercises1 remains always the same4 ,this is the proof on which common sense and exact science alike rely4 ,when1 for example1 somebody known to have existed a few years since is said to exist still1 by one who yesterday saw him1 his assertion amounts to this--that an object which in past time wrought on his consciousness a certain group of changes1 still exists because a like group of changes has been again wrought on his consciousness3 the continuance of the power thus to impress him1 he holds to prove the continuance of the object4 ,should some auditor allege a mistake in identity1 the witness is admitted to give conclusive proof when he says that he not only saw1 but shook hands with this person1 and remarked while grasping his hand1 that absence of the index finger which was his known peculiarity3 the implication being1 that an object which through a special combination of forces1 produces special tactual impressions1 is concluded still to exist while it continues still to do this4 ,even more clearly do we see that force is our ultimate measure of ,matter1 in those cases where the shape of the matter has been changed4 ,a piece of gold given to an artizan to be worked into an ornament1 and which when brought back appears to be less1 is placed in the scales2 and if it balances a much smaller weight than it did in its rough state1 we infer that much has been lost either in manipulation or by direct abstraction4 ,here the obvious postulate is1 that the quantity of ,matter is finally determinable by the quantity of gravitative force it manifests4 ,and this is the kind of evidence on which ,science bases its experimentally-established induction that ,matter is indestructible4 ,whenever a piece of substance lately visible and tangible1 has been reduced to an invisible1 intangible shape1 but is proved by the weight of the gas into which it has been transformed to be still existing2 the assumption is1 that though otherwise insensible to us1 the amount of matter is the same1 if it still tends towards the ,earth with the same force4 ,similarly1 every case in which the weight of an element present in combination1 is inferred from the known weight of another element which it neutralizes1 is a case in which the quantity of matter is expressed in terms of the quantity of chemical force it exerts2 and in which this specific chemical force is assumed to be the necessary correlative of a specific gravitative force4 ,thus then by the indestructibility of ,matter1 we really mean the indestructibility of the force with which ,matter affects us4 ,as we become conscious of ,matter only through that resistance which it opposes to our muscular energy1 so do we become conscious of the permanence of ,matter only through the permanence of this resistance2 as either immediately or mediately proved to us4 ,and this truth is made manifest not only by analysis of the posteriori cognition1 but equally so by analysis of the priori one4 ,for that which we cannot conceive to be diminished by the continued compression of ,matter1 is not its occupancy of space1 but its ability to resist4 ,,chapter ,,vii4 ,,the ,,continuity ,,of ,,motion4 #fi4 ,another general truth of the same order with the foregoing1 must here be specified--one which1 though not so generally recognized1 has yet long been familiar among men of science4 ,the continuity of ,motion1 like the indestructibility of ,matter1 is clearly an axiom underlying the very possibility of a rational theory of ,evolution4 ,that kind of change in the arrangement of parts1 which we have found to constitute ,evolution1 could not be deductively explained were it possible for ,motion either to appear or disappear4 ,if those motions through which the parts pass into a new arrangement1 might either proceed from nothing or lapse into nothing1 there would be an end to scientific interpretation of them4 ,each constituent change might as well as not be supposed to begin and end of itself4 ,the axiomatic character of the truth that ,motion is continuous1 is recognized only after the discipline of exact science has given precision to the conceptions4 ,aboriginal men1 our uneducated population1 and even most of the so-called educated1 think in an extremely indefinite manner4 ,from careless observations1 they pass by careless reasoning1 to conclusions of which they do not contemplate the implications--conclusions which they never develope for the purpose of seeing whether they are consistent4 ,accepting without criticism the dicta of unaided perception1 to the effect that surrounding bodies when put in motion soon return to rest1 the great majority tacitly assume that the motion is actually lost4 ,they do not consider whether the phenomenon can be otherwise interpreted2 or whether the interpretation they put on it can be mentally realized4 ,they are content with a colligation of mere appearances4 ,but the establishment of certain facts having quite an opposite implication1 led to inquiries which have gradually proved such appearances to be illusive4 ,the discovery that the planets revolve round the ,sun with undiminishing speed1 raised the suspicion that a moving body1 when not interfered with1 will go on for ever without change of velocity2 and suggested the question whether bodies which lose their motion1 do not at the same time communicate as much motion to other bodies4 ,it was a familiar fact that a stone would glide further over a smooth surface1 such as ice1 presenting no small objects to which it could part with its motion by collision1 than over a surface strewn with such small objects2 and that a projectile would travel a far greater distance through a rare medium like air1 than through a dense medium like water4 ,thus the primitive notion that moving bodies had an inherent tendency gradually to lose their motion and finally stop--a notion of which the ,greeks did not get rid1 but which lasted till the time of ,galileo--began to give way4 ,it was further shaken by such experiments as those of ,hooke1 which proved that the spinning of a top continued long in proportion as it was prevented from communicating movement to surrounding matter--experiments which1 when repeated with the aid of modern appliances1 have shown that in vacuo such rotation1 retarded only by the friction of the axis1 will continue for nearly an hour4 ,thus have been gradually dispersed1 the obstacles to the reception of the first law of motion2--the law1 namely1 that when not influenced by external forces1 a moving body will go on in a straight line with a uniform velocity4 ,and this law is in our day being merged in the more general one1 that ,motion1 like ,matter1 is indestructible2 and that whatever is lost by any one portion of matter is transferred to other portions--a conclusion which1 however much at variance it seems with cases of sudden arrest from collision with an immovable object1 is yet reconciled with such cases by the discovery that the motion apparently lost continues under new forms1 though forms not directly perceptible4 99 99 99 99 99 #gj4 ,and here it may be remarked of ,motion1 as it was before of ,matter1 that its indestructibility is not only to be inductively inferred1 but that it is a necessity of thought3 its destructibility never having been truly conceived at all1 but having always been1 as it is now1 a mere verbal proposition that cannot be realized in consciousness--a pseud-idea4 ,whether that absolute reality which produces in us the consciousness we call ,motion1 be or be not an eternal mode of the ,unknowable1 it is impossible for us to say2 but that the relative reality which we call ,motion never can come into existence1 or cease to exist1 is a truth involved in the very nature of our consciousness4 ,to think of ,motion as either being created or annihilated--to think of nothing becoming something1 or something becoming nothing--is to establish in consciousness a relation between two terms of which one is absent from consciousness1 which is impossible4 ,the very nature of intelligence1 negatives the supposition that ,motion can be conceived 7much less known7 to either commence or cease4 99 99 99 99 99 #ga4 ,it remains to be pointed out that the continuity of ,motion1 as well as the indestructibility of ,matter1 is really known to us in terms of force4 ,that a certain manifestation of force remains for ever undiminished1 is the ultimate content of the thought2 whether reached posteriori or priori4 ,from terrestrial physics let us take the case of sound propagated to a great distance4 ,whenever we are directly conscious of the causation of sound 7namely1 when we produce it ourselves71 its invariable antecedent is force4 ,the immediate sequence of this force we know to be motion--first1 of our own organs1 and then of the body which we set vibrating4 ,the vibrations so generated we can discern both through the fingers and through the ears2 and that the sensations received by the ears are the equivalents of mechanical force communicated to the air1 and by it impressed on surrounding objects1 we have clear proof when objects are fractured3 as windows by the report of a cannon2 or a glass vessel by a powerful voice4 ,on what1 then1 rests the reasoning when1 as occasionally happens under favourable circumstances1 men on board a vessel a hundred miles from shore1 hear the ringing of church-bells on placing their ears in the focus of the main sail2 and when it is inferred that atmospheric undulations have traversed this immense distance8 ,manifestly1 the assertion that the motion of the clapper1 transformed into the vibrations of the bell1 and communicated to the surrounding air1 has propagated itself thus far on all sides1 diminishing in intensity as the mass of air moved became greater1 is based solely upon a certain change produced in consciousness through the ears4 ,the listeners are not conscious of motion2 they are conscious of an impression produced on them--an impression which implies a force as its necessary correlative4 ,with force they begin1 and with force they end3 the intermediate motion being simply inferred4 ,again1 where1 as in celestial physics1 the continuity of motion is quantitatively proved1 the proof is not direct but inferential2 and forces furnish the data for the inference4 ,a particular planet can be identified only by its constant power to affect our visual organs in a special way--to impress upon the retina a group of forces standing in a particular correlation4 ,further1 such planet has not been seen to move by the astronomical observer2 but its motion is inferred from a comparison of its present position with the position it before occupied4 ,if rigorously examined1 this comparison proves to be a comparison between the different impressions produced on him by the different adjustments of the observing instruments4 ,going a step further back1 it turns out that this difference is meaningless until shown to correspond with a certain calculated position which the planet must occupy1 supposing that no motion has been lost4 ,and if1 finally1 we examine the implied calculation1 we find that it makes allowances for those accelerations and retardations which ellipticity of the orbit involves1 as well as those variations of velocity caused by adjacent planets--we find1 that is1 that the motion is concluded to be indestructible not from the uniform velocity of the planet1 but from the constant quantity of motion exhibited when allowance is made for the motion communicated to1 or received from1 other celestial bodies4 ,and when we ask how this communicated motion is estimated1 we discover that the estimate is based upon certain laws of force2 which laws1 one and all1 embody the postulate that force cannot be destroyed4 ,without the axiom that action and re-action are equal and opposite1 astronomy could not make its exact predictions2 and we should lack the rigorous inductive proof they furnish that motion can never be lost1 but can only be transferred4 ,similarly with the priori conclusion that ,motion is continuous4 ,that which defies suppression in thought1 is really the force which the motion indicates4 ,the unceasing change of position1 considered by itself1 may be mentally abolished without difficulty4 ,we can readily imagine retardation and stoppage to result from the action of external bodies4 ,but to imagine this1 is not possible without an abstraction of the force implied by the motion4 ,we are obliged to conceive this force as impressed in the shape of re-action on the bodies that cause the arrest4 ,and the motion that is communicated to them1 we are compelled to regard1 not as directly communicated1 but as a product of the communicated force4 ,we can mentally diminish the velocity or space-element of motion1 by diffusing the momentum or force-element over a larger mass of matter2 but the quantity of this force-element1 which we regard as the cause of the motion1 is unchangeable in thought4 ,,chapter ,,viii4 ,,the ,,persistence ,,of ,,force4#ab #gb4 ,before taking a first step in the rational interpretation of ,evolution1 it is needful to recognize1 not only the facts that ,matter is indestructible and ,motion continuous1 but also the fact that ,force persists4 ,an attempt to assign the causes of ,evolution1 would manifestly be absurd1 if that agency to which the metamorphosis in general and in detail is due1 could either come into existence or cease to exist4 ,the succession of phenomena would in such case be altogether arbitrary2 and deductive science impossible4 ,here1 indeed1 the necessity is even more imperative than in the two preceding cases4 ,for the validity of the proofs given that ,matter is indestructible and ,motion continuous1 really depends upon the validity of the proof that ,force is persistent4 ,an analysis of the reasoning demonstrated that in both cases1 the posteriori conclusion involves the assumption that unchanged quantities of ,matter and ,motion are proved by unchanged manifestations of ,force2 and in the priori cognition we found this to be the essential constituent4 ,hence1 that the quantity of ,force remains always the same1 is the fundamental cognition in the absence of which these derivative cognitions must disappear4 99 99 99 99 99 #gc4 ,but now on what grounds do we assert the persistence of ,force8 ,inductively we can allege no evidence except such as is presented to us throughout the world of sensible phenomena4 ,no force however1 save that of which we are conscious during our own muscular efforts1 is immediately known to us4 ,all other force is mediately known through the changes we attribute to it4 ,since1 then1 we cannot infer the persistence of ,force from our own sensation of it1 which does not persist2 we must infer it1 if it is inferred at all1 from the continuity of ,motion1 and the undiminished ability of ,matter to produce certain effects4 ,but to reason thus is manifestly to reason in a circle4 ,it is absurd to allege the indestructibility of ,matter1 because we find experimentally that under whatever changes of form a given mass of matter exhibits the same gravitation1 and then afterwards to argue that gravitation is constant because a given mass of matter exhibits always the same quantity of it4 ,we cannot prove the continuity of ,motion by assuming that ,force is persistent1 and then prove the persistence of ,force by assuming that ,motion is continuous4 ,the data of both objective and subjective science being involved in this question touching the nature of our cognition that ,force is persistent1 it will be desirable here to examine it more closely4 ,at the risk of trying the reader's patience1 we must reconsider the reasoning through which the indestructibility of ,matter and the continuity of ,motion are established2 that we may see how impossible it is to arrive by parallel reasoning at the persistence of ,force4 ,in all three cases the question is one of quantity3--does the ,matter1 or ,motion1 or ,force1 ever diminish in quantity8 ,quantitative science implies measurement2 and measurement implies a unit of measure4 ,the units of measure from which all others of any exactness are derived1 are units of linear extension4 ,from these1 through the medium of the equal-armed lever or scales1 we derive our equal units of weight1 or gravitative force4 ,and it is by means of these equal units of extension and equal units of weight1 that we make those quantitative comparisons by which the truths of exact science are reached4 ,throughout the investigations leading the chemist to the conclusion that of the carbon which has disappeared during combustion1 no portion has been lost1 and that in any compound afterwards formed by the resulting carbonic acid the whole of the original carbon is present1 what is his repeatedly assigned proof8 ,that afforded by the scales4 ,in what terms is the verdict of the scales given8 ,in grains--in units of weight--in units of gravitative force4 ,and what is the total content of the verdict8 ,that as many units of gravitative force as the carbon exhibited at first1 it exhibits still4 ,the quantity of matter is asserted to be the same1 if the number of units of force it counter-balances is the same4 ,the validity of the inference1 then1 depends entirely upon the constancy of the units of force4 ,if the force with which the portion of metal called a grain-weight1 tends towards the ,earth1 has varied1 the inference that ,matter is indestructible is vicious4 ,everything turns on the truth of the assumption that the gravitation of the weights is persistent2 and of this no proof is assigned1 or can be assigned4 ,in the reasonings of the astronomer there is a like implication2 from which we may draw the like conclusion4 ,no problem in celestial physics can be solved without the assumption of some unit of force4 ,this unit need not be1 like a pound or a ton1 one of which we can take direct cognizance4 ,it is requisite only that the mutual attraction which some two of the bodies concerned exercise at a given distance1 should be taken as one2 so that the other attractions with which the problem deals1 may be expressed in terms of this one4 ,such unit being assumed1 the momenta which the respective masses will generate in each other in a given time1 are calculated2 and compounding these with the momenta they already have1 their places at the end of that time are predicted4 ,the prediction is verified by observation4 ,from this1 either of two inferences may be drawn4 ,assuming the masses to be fixed1 the motion may be proved to be undiminished2 or assuming the motion to be undiminished1 the masses may be proved to be fixed4 ,but the validity of one or other inference1 depends wholly on the truth of the assumption that the unit of force is unchanged4 ,let it be supposed that the gravitation of the two bodies towards each other at the given distance1 has varied1 and the conclusions drawn are no longer true4 ,nor is it only in their concrete data that the reasonings of terrestrial and celestial physics assume the persistence of ,force4 ,they equally assume it in the abstract principle with which they set out2 and which they repeat in justification of every step4 ,the equality of action and reaction is taken for granted from beginning to end of either argument2 and to assert that action and reaction are equal and opposite1 is to assert that ,force is persistent4 ,the allegation really amounts to this1 that there cannot be an isolated force beginning and ending in nothing2 but that any force manifested1 implies an equal antecedent force from which it is derived1 and against which it is a reaction4 ,further1 that the force so originating cannot disappear without result2 but must expend itself in some other manifestation of force1 which1 in being produced1 becomes its reaction2 and so on continually4 ,clearly then the persistence of ,force is an ultimate truth of which no inductive proof is possible4 ,we might indeed be certain1 even in the absence of any such analysis as the foregoing1 that there must exist some principle which1 as being the basis of science1 cannot be established by science4 ,all reasoned-out conclusions whatever1 must rest on some postulate4 ,as before shown 7 #bc71 we cannot go on merging derivative truths in those wider and wider truths from which they are derived1 without reaching at last a widest truth which can be merged in no other1 or derived from no other4 ,and whoever contemplates the relation in which it stands to the truths of science in general1 will see that this truth transcending demonstration is the persistence of ,force4 99 99 99 99 99 #gd4 ,but now what is the force of which we predicate persistence8 ,it is not the force we are immediately conscious of in our own muscular efforts2 for this does not persist4 ,as soon as an outstretched limb is relaxed1 the sense of tension disappears4 ,true1 we assert that in the stone thrown or in the weight lifted1 is exhibited the effect of this muscular tension2 and that the force which has ceased to be present in our consciousness1 exists elsewhere4 ,but it does not exist elsewhere under any form cognizable by us4 ,it was proved 7 #ah71 that though1 on raising an object from the ground1 we are obliged to think of its downward pull as equal and opposite to our upward pull2 and though it is impossible to represent these pulls as equal without representing them as like in kind2 yet1 since their likeness in kind would imply in the object a sensation of muscular tension1 which cannot be ascribed to it1 we are compelled to admit that force as it exists out of our consciousness1 is not force as we know it4 ,hence the force of which we assert persistence is that ,absolute ,force of which we are indefinitely conscious as the necessary correlate of the force we know4 ,thus1 by the persistence of ,force1 we really mean the persistence of some ,power which transcends our knowledge and conception4 ,the manifestations1 as occurring either in ourselves or outside of us1 do not persist2 but that which persists is the ,unknown ,cause of these manifestations4 ,in other words1 asserting the persistence of ,force1 is but another mode of asserting an ,unconditioned ,reality1 without beginning or end4 ,thus1 quite unexpectedly1 we come down once more to that ultimate truth in which1 as we saw1 ,religion and ,science coalesce4 ,on examining the data underlying a rational theory of ,evolution1 we find them all at last resolvable into that datum without which consciousness was shown to be impossible--the continued existence of an ,unknowable as the necessary correlative of the ,knowable4 ,once commenced1 the analysis of the truths taken for granted in scientific inquiries1 inevitably brings us down to this deepest truth1 in which ,common ,sense and ,philosophy are reconciled4 ,the arguments and conclusion contained in this and the foregoing three chapters1 supply1 indeed1 the complement to the arguments and conclusion set forth in the preceding part of this work4 ,it was there first shown1 by an examination of our ultimate religious ideas1 that knowledge of ,absolute ,being is impossible2 and the impossibility of knowing ,absolute ,being1 was also shown by an examination of our ultimate scientific ideas4 ,in a succeeding chapter a subjective analysis proved1 that while1 by the very conditions of thought1 we are prevented from knowing anything beyond relative being2 yet that by these very same conditions of thought1 an indefinite consciousness of ,absolute ,being is necessitated4 ,and here1 by objective analysis1 we similarly find that the axiomatic truths of physical science1 unavoidably postulate ,absolute ,being as their common basis4 ,thus there is even a more profound agreement between ,religion and ,science than was before shown4 ,not only are they wholly at one on the negative proposition that the ,non-relative cannot be known2 but they are wholly at one on the positive proposition that the ,non-relative is an actual existence4 ,both are obliged by the demonstrated untenability of their supposed cognitions1 to confess that the ,ultimate ,reality is incognizable2 and yet both are obliged to assert the existence of an ,ultimate ,reality4 ,without this1 ,religion has no subject-matter2 and without this1 ,science1 subjective and objective1 lacks its indispensable datum4 ,we cannot construct a theory of internal phenomena without postulating ,absolute ,being2 and unless we postulate ,absolute ,being1 or being which persists1 we cannot construct a theory of external phenomena4 99 99 99 99 99 #ge4 ,a few words must be added respecting the nature of this fundamental consciousness4 ,already it has been looked at from several points of view2 and here it seems needful finally to sum up the results4 ,in ,chapter ,,iv4 we saw that the ,unknown ,power of which neither beginning nor end can be conceived1 is present to us as that unshaped material of consciousness which is shaped afresh in every thought4 ,our inability to conceive its limitation1 is thus simply the obverse of our inability to put an end to the thinking subject while still continuing to think4 ,in the two foregoing chapters1 we contemplated this fundamental truth under another aspect4 ,the indestructibility of ,matter and the continuity of ,motion1 we saw to be really corollaries from the impossibility of establishing in thought a relation between something and nothing4 ,what we call the establishment of a relation in thought1 is the passage of the substance of consciousness1 from one form into another4 ,to think of something becoming nothing1 would involve that this substance of consciousness having just existed under a given form1 should next assume no form2 or should cease to be consciousness4 ,and thus our inability to conceive ,matter and ,motion destroyed1 is our inability to suppress consciousness itself4 ,what1 in these two foregoing chapters1 was proved true of ,matter and ,motion1 is1 fortiori1 true of the ,force out of which our conceptions of ,matter and ,motion are built4 ,indeed1 as we saw1 that which is indestructible in matter and motion1 is the force they present4 ,and1 as we here see1 the truth that ,force is indestructible1 is the obverse of the truth that the ,unknown ,cause of the changes going on in consciousness is indestructible4 ,so that the persistence of consciousness1 constitutes at once our immediate experience of the persistence of ,force1 and imposes on us the necessity we are under of asserting its persistence4 99 99 99 99 99 #gf4 ,thus1 in all ways there is forced on us the fact1 that here is an ultimate truth given in our mental constitution4 ,it is not only a datum of science1 but it is a datum which even the assertion of our nescience involves4 ,whoever alleges that the inability to conceive a beginning or end of the ,universe1 is a negative result of our mental structure1 cannot deny that our consciousness of the ,universe as persistent1 is a positive result of our mental structure4 ,and this persistence of the ,universe1 is the persistence of that ,unknown ,cause1 ,power1 or ,force1 which is manifested to us through all phenomena4 ,such then is the foundation of any possible system of positive knowledge4 ,deeper than demonstration--deeper even than definite cognition--deep as the very nature of mind1 is the postulate at which we have arrived4 ,its authority transcends all other whatever2 for not only is it given in the constitution of our own consciousness1 but it is impossible to imagine a consciousness so constituted as not to give it4 ,thought1 involving simply the establishment of relations1 may be readily conceived to go on while yet these relations have not been organized into the abstracts we call ,space and ,time2 and so there is a conceivable kind of consciousness which does not contain the truths1 commonly called priori1 involved in the organization of these forms of relations4 ,but thought cannot be conceived to go on without some element between which its relations may be established2 and so there is no conceivable kind of consciousness which does not imply continued existence as its datum4 ,consciousness without this or that particular form is possible2 but consciousness without contents is impossible4 ,the sole truth which transcends experience by underlying it1 is thus the persistence of ,force4 ,this being the basis of experience1 must be the basis of any scientific organization of experiences4 ,to this an ultimate analysis brings us down2 and on this a rational synthesis must build up4 ----- ,footnote #ab3 ,some two years ago1 ,i expressed to my friend ,professor ,huxley1 my dissatisfaction with the current expression--8,conservation of ,force20 assigning as reasons1 first1 that the word 8conservation0 implies a conserver and an act of conserving2 and1 second1 that it does not imply the existence of the force before that particular manifestation of it with which we commence4 ,in place of 8conservation10 ,professor ,huxley suggested persistence4 ,this entirely meets the first of the two objections2 and though the second may be urged against it1 no other word less faulty in this respect can be found4 ,in the absence of a word specially coined for the purpose1 it seems the best2 and as such ,i adopt it4 ,,chapter ,,ix4 ,,the ,,correlation ,,and ,,equivalence ,,of ,,forces4 #gg4 ,when1 to the unaided senses1 ,science began to add supplementary senses in the shape of measuring instruments1 men began to perceive various phenomena which eyes and fingers could not distinguish4 ,of known forms of force1 minuter manifestations became appreciable2 and forms of force before unknown were rendered cognizable and measurable4 ,where forces had apparently ended in nothing1 and had been carelessly supposed to have actually done so1 instrumental observation proved that effects had in every instance been produced3 the forces reappearing in new shapes4 ,hence there has at length arisen the inquiry whether the force displayed in each surrounding change1 does not in the act of expenditure undergo metamorphosis into an equivalent amount of some other force or forces4 ,and to this inquiry experiment is giving an affirmative answer1 which becomes day by day more decisive4 ,grove1 ,helmholtz1 and ,meyer1 are more than any others to be credited with the clear enunciation of this doctrine4 ,let us glance at the evidence on which it rests4 ,motion1 wherever we can directly trace its genesis1 we find to pre-exist as some other mode of force4 ,our own voluntary acts have always certain sensations of muscular tension as their antecedents4 ,when1 as in letting fall a relaxed limb1 we are conscious of a bodily movement requiring no effort1 the explanation is that the effort was exerted in raising the limb to the position whence it fell4 ,in this case1 as in the case of an inanimate body descending to the ,earth1 the force accumulated by the downward motion is just equal to the force previously expended in the act of elevation4 ,conversely1 ,motion that is arrested produces1 under different circumstances1 heat1 electricity1 magnetism1 light4 ,from the warming of the hands by rubbing them together1 up to the ignition of a railway-brake by intense friction--from the lighting of detonating powder by percussion1 up to the setting on fire a block of wood by a few blows from a steam-hammer2 we have abundant instances in which heat arises as ,motion ceases4 ,it is uniformly found1 that the heat generated is great in proportion as the ,motion lost is great2 and that to diminish the arrest of motion1 by diminishing the friction1 is to diminish the quantity of heat evolved4 ,the production of electricity by ,motion is illustrated equally in the boy's experiment with rubbed sealing-wax1 in the common electrical machine1 and in the apparatus for exciting electricity by the escape of steam4 ,wherever there is friction between heterogeneous bodies1 electrical disturbance is one of the consequences4 ,magnetism may result from ,motion either immediately1 as through percussion on iron1 or mediately as through electric currents previously generated by ,motion4 ,and similarly1 ,motion may create light2 either directly1 as in the minute incandescent fragments struck off by violent collisions1 or indirectly1 as through the electric spark4 8,lastly1 ,motion may be again reproduced by the forces which have emanated from ,motion2 thus1 the divergence of the electrometer1 the revolution of the electrical wheel1 the deflection of the magnetic needle1 are1 when resulting from frictional electricity1 palpable movements reproduced by the intermediate modes of force1 which have themselves been originated by motion40 ,that mode of force which we distinguish as ,heat1 is now generally regarded by physicists as molecular motion--not motion as displayed in the changed relations of sensible masses to each other1 but as occurring among the units of which such sensible masses consist4 ,if we cease to think of ,heat as that particular sensation given to us by bodies in certain conditions1 and consider the phenomena otherwise presented by these bodies1 we find that motion1 either in them or in surrounding bodies1 or in both1 is all that we have evidence of4 ,with one or two exceptions which are obstacles to every theory of ,heat1 heated bodies expand2 and expansion can be interpreted only as a movement of the units of a mass in relation to each other4 ,that so-called radiation through which anything of higher temperature than things around it1 communicates ,heat to them1 is clearly a species of motion4 ,moreover1 the evidence afforded by the thermometer that ,heat thus diffuses itself1 is simply a movement caused in the mercurial column4 ,and that the molecular motion which we call ,heat1 may be transformed into visible motion1 familiar proof is given by the steam-engine2 in which 8the piston and all its concomitant masses of matter are moved by the molecular dilatation of the vapour of water40 ,where ,heat is absorbed without apparent result1 modern inquiries show that decided though unobtrusive changes are produced3 as on glass1 the molecular state of which is so far changed by heat1 that a polarized ray of light passing through it becomes visible1 which it does not do when the glass is cold2 or as on polished metallic surfaces1 which are so far changed in structure by thermal radiations from objects very close to them1 as to retain permanent impressions of such objects4 ,the transformation of ,heat into electricity1 occurs when dissimilar metals touching each other are heated at the point of contact3 electric currents being so induced4 ,solid1 incombustible matter introduced into heated gas1 as lime into the oxyhydrogen flame1 becomes incandescent2 and so exhibits the conversion of ,heat into light4 ,the production of magnetism by ,heat1 if it cannot be proved to take place directly1 may be proved to take place indirectly through the medium of electricity4 ,and through the same medium may be established the correlation of ,heat and chemical affinity--a correlation which is indeed implied by the marked influence that ,heat exercises on chemical composition and decomposition4 ,the transformations of ,electricity into other modes of force1 are still more clearly demonstrable4 ,produced by the motion of heterogeneous bodies in contact1 ,electricity1 through attractions and repulsions1 will immediately reproduce motion in neighbouring bodies4 ,now a current of ,electricity generates magnetism in a bar of soft iron2 and now the rotation of a permanent magnet generates currents of ,electricity4 ,here we have a battery in which from the play of chemical affinities an electric current results2 and there1 in the adjacent cell1 we have an electric current effecting chemical decomposition4 ,in the conducting wire we witness the transformation of ,electricity into heat2 while in electric sparks and in the voltaic arc we see light produced4 ,atomic arrangement1 too1 is changed by ,electricity3 as instance the transfer of matter from pole to pole of a battery2 the fractures caused by the disruptive discharge2 the formation of crystals under the influence of electric currents4 ,and whether1 conversely1 ,electricity be or be not directly generated by re-arrangement of the atoms of matter1 it is at any rate indirectly so generated through the intermediation of magnetism4 ,how from ,magnetism the other physical forces result1 must be next briefly noted--briefly1 because in each successive case the illustrations become in great part the obverse forms of those before given4 ,that ,magnetism produces motion is the ordinary evidence we have of its existence4 ,in the magneto-electric machine we see a rotating magnet evolving electricity4 ,and the electricity so evolved may immediately after exhibit itself as heat1 light1 or chemical affinity4 ,faraday's discovery of the effect of ,magnetism on polarized light1 as well as the discovery that change of magnetic state is accompanied by heat1 point to further like connexions4 ,lastly1 various experiments show that the magnetization of a body alters its internal structure2 and that conversely1 the alteration of its internal structure1 as by mechanical strain1 alters its magnetic condition4 ,improbable as it seemed1 it is now proved that from ,light also may proceed the like variety of agencies4 ,the solar rays change the atomic arrangements of particular crystals4 ,certain mixed gases1 which do not otherwise combine1 combine in the sunshine4 ,in some compounds ,light produces decomposition4 ,since the inquiries of photographers have drawn attention to the subject1 it has been shown that 8a vast number of substances1 both elementary and compound1 are notably affected by this agent1 even those apparently the most unalterable in character1 such as metals40 ,and when a daguerreotype plate is connected with a proper apparatus 8we get chemical action on the plate1 electricity circulating through the wires1 magnetism in the coil1 heat in the helix1 and motion in the needles40 ,the genesis of all other modes of force from ,chemical ,action1 scarcely needs pointing out4 ,the ordinary accompaniment of chemical combination is heat2 and when the affinities are intense1 light also is1 under fit conditions1 produced4 ,chemical changes involving alteration of bulk1 cause motion1 both in the combining elements and in adjacent masses of matter3 witness the propulsion of a bullet by the explosion of gunpowder4 ,in the galvanic battery we see electricity resulting from chemical composition and decomposition4 ,while through the medium of this electricity1 ,chemical ,action produces magnetism4 ,these facts1 the larger part of which are culled from ,mr4 ,grove's work on 8,the ,correlation of ,physical ,forces10 show us that each force is transformable1 directly or indirectly1 into the others4 ,in every change ,force undergoes metamorphosis2 and from the new form or forms it assumes1 may subsequently result either the previous one or any of the rest1 in endless variety of order and combination4 ,it is further becoming manifest that the physical forces stand not simply in qualitative correlations with each other1 but also in quantitative correlations4 ,besides proving that one mode of force may be transformed into another mode1 experiments illustrate the truth that from a definite amount of one1 definite amounts of others always arise4 ,ordinarily it is indeed difficult to show this2 since it mostly happens that the transformation of any force is not into some one of the rest but into several of them3 the proportions being determined by the ever-varying conditions4 ,but in certain cases1 positive results have been reached4 ,mr4 ,joule has ascertained that the fall of #ggb lbs4 through one foot1 will raise the temperature of a pound of water one degree of ,fahrenheit4 ,the investigations of ,dulong1 ,petit and ,neumann1 have proved a relation in amount between the affinities of combining bodies and the heat evolved during their combination4 ,between chemical action and voltaic electricity1 a quantitative connexion has also been established3 ,faraday's experiments implying that a specific measure of electricity is disengaged by a given measure of chemical action4 ,the well-determined relations between the quantities of heat generated and water turned into steam1 or still better the known expansion produced in steam by each additional degree of heat1 may be cited in further evidence4 ,whence it is no longer doubted that among the several forms which force assumes1 the quantitative relations are fixed4 ,the conclusion tacitly agreed on by physicists1 is1 not only that the physical forces undergo metamorphoses1 but that a certain amount of each is the constant equivalent of certain amounts of the others4 99 99 99 99 99 #gh4 ,throughout ,evolution under all its phases1 this truth of course invariably holds4 ,every successive change or group of changes forming part of it1 is of necessity limited by the conditions thus implied4 ,the forces which any step in ,evolution exhibits1 must be affiliable on the like or unlike forces previously existing2 while from the forces so generated must thereafter be derived others more or less transformed4 ,and besides recognizing the forces at any time existing1 as necessarily linked with those preceding and succeeding them1 we must also recognize the amounts of these forces successively manifested as determinate1--as necessarily producing such and such quantities of results1 and as necessarily limited to those quantities4 ,involved as are the phenomena of ,evolution1 it is not to be expected that a definite quantitative relation can in each case1 or indeed in any case1 be shown between the forces expended in successive phases4 ,we have not adequate data for this2 and probably shall never have them4 ,the antecedents of the simpler forms of ,evolution1 belong to a remote past respecting which we can have nothing but inferential knowledge2 while the antecedents of the only kind of ,evolution which is traceable from beginning to end 7namely1 that of individual organisms7 are too complex to be dealt with by exact methods4 ,hence we cannot hope to establish equivalence among the successive manifestations of force which each order of ,evolution affords4 ,the most we can hope is to establish a qualitative correlation that is indefinitely quantitative--quantitative in so far as involving something like a due proportion between causes and effects4 ,if this can be done1 however1 some progress will be made towards the solution of our problem4 ,though it may be beyond our power to show a measurable relation between the force or group of forces which any phase of ,evolution displays1 and the force or group of forces immediately succeeding it2 yet if we can show that there always are antecedent forces1 and that the effects they produce always become the antecedents of further ones--if while unable to calculate how much of each change will be produced1 we can prove that a change of that kind was necessitated--if we can discern even the vaguest correspondence between the amount of such change and the amount of the pre-existing force2 we shall advance a step towards interpreting the transformation of the simple into the complex4 ,with the view of attempting this1 let us now reconsider the different types of ,evolution awhile since delineated3 taking them in the same order as before4 99 99 99 99 99 #gi4 ,on contemplating our ,solar ,system the first fact which strikes us1 is1 that all its members are in motion2 and that their motion is of a two-fold1 or rather of a three-fold1 kind4 ,each planet and satellite has a movement of rotation and a movement of translation2 besides the movement through space which all have in common with their rotating primary4 ,whence this unceasing change of place8 ,the hypothesis of ,evolution supplies us with an answer4 ,impossible as it is to assign a reason for the pre-existence of matter in the diffused form supposed2 yet assuming its pre-existence in that form1 we have in the gravitation of its parts a cause of motion adequate to the results4 ,so far too as the evidence carries us1 we can perceive some quantitative relation between the motions produced1 and the gravitative forces expended in producing them4 ,the planets formed from that matter which has travelled the shortest distance towards the common centre of gravity1 have the smallest velocities3 the uniform law being that in advancing from the outermost to the innermost planets1 the rate of orbital motion progressively increases4 ,it may indeed be remarked that this is explicable on the teleological hypothesis2 since it is a condition to equilibrium4 ,but without dwelling on the fact that this is beside the question1 it will suffice to point out that the like cannot be said of the planetary rotations4 ,no such final cause can be assigned for the rapid axial movement of ,jupiter and ,saturn1 or the slow axial movement of ,mercury4 ,but if in pursuance of the doctrine of correlation we look for the antecedents of these gyrations which all planets exhibit1 the theory of ,evolution furnishes us with equivalent ones2 and ones which bear manifest quantitative relations to the motions displayed4 ,for the planets that turn on their axes with extreme rapidity1 are those having great masses and large orbits--those1 that is1 of which the once diffused elements moved to their centres of gravity through immense spaces1 and so acquired high velocities4 ,while1 conversely1 there has resulted the smallest axial movement where the orbit and the mass are both the smallest4 8,but what10 it may be asked1 8has in such case become of all that motion which brought about the aggregation of this diffused matter into solid bodies80 ,the rotation of each body can be but a residuary result of concentration--a result due to the imperfect balancing of gravitative movements from opposite points towards the common centre4 ,such gravitative movements from opposite points must in great measure destroy each other4 ,what then has become of these mutually-destroyed motions8 ,the answer which the doctrine of correlation suggests is--they must have been radiated in the form of heat and light4 ,and this answer the evidence1 so far as it goes1 confirms4 ,apart from any speculation respecting the genesis of the solar system1 the inquiries of geologists lead to the conclusion that the heat of the ,earth's still molten nucleus is but a remnant of the heat which once made molten the entire ,earth4 ,the mountainous surfaces of the ,moon and of ,venus 7which alone are near enough to be scrutinized71 indicating1 as they do1 crusts that have1 like our own1 been corrugated by contraction1 imply that these bodies too have undergone refrigeration--imply in each of them a primitive heat1 such as the hypothesis necessitates4 ,lastly1 we have in the ,sun a still-continued production of this heat and light1 which must result from the arrest of diffused matter moving towards a common centre of gravity4 ,here also1 as before1 a quantitative relation is traceable4 ,among the bodies which make up the ,solar ,system1 those containing comparatively small amounts of matter whose centripetal motion has been destroyed1 have already lost nearly all the produced heat3 a result which their relatively larger surfaces have facilitated4 ,but the ,sun1 a thousand times as great in mass as the largest planet1 and having therefore to give off an enormously greater quantity of heat and light due to arrest of moving matter1 is still radiating with great intensity4 ,thus we see that when1 in pursuance of the doctrine of correlation1 we ask whence come the forces which our ,solar ,system displays1 the hypothesis of ,evolution gives us a proximate explanation4 ,if the ,solar ,system once existed in a state of indefinite1 incoherent homogeneity1 and has progressed to its present state of definite1 coherent heterogeneity2 then the ,motion1 ,heat1 and ,light now exhibited by its members1 are interpretable as the correlatives of pre-existing forces2 and between them and their antecedents we may discern relations that are not only qualitative1 but also rudely quantitative4 ,how matter came to exist under the form assumed1 is a mystery which we must regard as ultimate4 ,but grant such a previous form of existence1 and the hypothesis of ,evolution interpreted by the laws of correlation1 explains for us the forces as we now see them4 99 99 99 99 99 #hj4 ,if we inquire the origin of those forces which have wrought the surface of our planet into its present shape1 we find them traceable to the same primordial source as that just assigned4 ,assuming the solar system to have been evolved1 then geologic changes are either direct or indirect results of the unexpended heat caused by nebular condensation4 ,these changes are commonly divided into igneous and aqueous3--heads under which we may most conveniently consider them4 ,all those periodic disturbances which we call earthquakes1 all those elevations and subsidences which they severally produce1 all those accumulated effects of many such elevations and subsidences exhibited in ocean-basins1 islands1 continents1 table-lands1 mountain-chains1 and all those formations which are distinguished as volcanic1 geologists now regard as modifications of the ,earth's crust produced by the still-molten matter occupying its interior4 ,however untenable may be the details of ,m4 ,elie de ,beaumont's theory1 there is good reason to accept the general proposition that the disruptions and variations of level which take place at intervals on the terrestrial surface1 are due to the progressive collapse of the ,earth's solid envelope upon its cooling and contracting nucleus4 ,even supposing that volcanic eruptions1 extrusions of igneous rock1 and upheaved mountain-chains1 could be otherwise satisfactorily accounted for1 which they cannot2 it would be impossible otherwise to account for those wide-spread elevations and depressions whence continents and oceans result4 ,the conclusion to be drawn is1 then1 that the forces displayed in these so-called igneous changes1 are derived positively or negatively from the unexpended heat of the ,earth's interior4 ,such phenomena as the fusion or agglutination of sedimentary deposits1 the warming of springs1 the sublimation of metals into the fissures where we find them as ores1 may be regarded as positive results of this residuary heat2 while fractures of strata and alterations of level are its negative results1 since they ensue on its escape4 ,the original cause of all these effects is still1 however1 as it has been from the first1 the gravitating movement of the ,earth's matter towards the ,earth's centre2 seeing that to this is due both the internal heat itself and the collapse which takes place as it is radiated into space4 ,when we inquire under what forms previously existed the force which works out the geological changes classed as aqueous1 the answer is less obvious4 ,the effects of rain1 of rivers1 of winds1 of waves1 of marine currents1 do not manifestly proceed from one general source4 ,analysis1 nevertheless1 proves to us that they have a common genesis4 ,if we ask1--,whence comes the power of the river-current1 bearing sediment down to the sea8 the reply is1--,the gravitation of water throughout the tract which this river drains4 ,if we ask1--,how came the water to be dispersed over this tract8 the reply is1--,it fell in the shape of rain4 ,if we ask1--,how came the rain to be in that position whence it fell8 the reply is1--,the vapour from which it was condensed was drifted there by the winds4 ,if we ask1--,how came this vapour to be at that elevation8 the reply is1--,it was raised by evaporation4 ,and if we ask1--,what force thus raised it8 the reply is1--,the sun's heat4 ,just that amount of gravitative force which the sun's heat overcame in raising the atoms of water1 is given out again in the fall of those atoms to the same level4 ,hence the denudations effected by rain and rivers1 during the descent of this condensed vapour to the level of the sea1 are indirectly due to the sun's heat4 ,similarly with the winds that transport the vapours hither and thither4 ,consequent as atmospheric currents are on differences of temperature 7either general1 as between the equatorial and polar regions1 or special as between tracts of the ,earth's surface of unlike physical characters7 all such currents are due to that source from which the varying quantities of heat proceed4 ,and if the winds thus originate1 so too do the waves raised by them on the sea's surface4 ,whence it follows that whatever changes waves produce--the wearing away of shores1 the breaking down of rocks into shingle1 sand1 and mud--are also traceable to the solar rays as their primary cause4 ,the same may be said of ocean-currents4 ,generated as the larger ones are by the excess of heat which the ocean in tropical climates continually acquires from the ,sun2 and generated as the smaller ones are by minor local differences in the quantities of solar heat absorbed2 it follows that the distribution of sediment and other geological processes which these marine currents effect1 are affiliable upon the force which the sun radiates4 ,the only aqueous agency otherwise originating is that of the tides--an agency which1 equally with the others1 is traceable to unexpended astronomical motion4 ,but making allowance for the changes which this works1 we reach the conclusion that the slow wearing down of continents and gradual filling up of seas1 by rain1 rivers1 winds1 waves1 and ocean-streams1 are the indirect effects of solar heat4 ,thus the implication forced on us by the doctrine of correlation1 that the forces which have moulded and re-moulded the ,earth's crust must have pre-existed under some other shape1 is quite in conformity with the theory of ,evolution2 since this pre-supposes certain forces that are both adequate to the results1 and cannot be expended without producing the results4 ,we see that while the geological changes classed as igneous1 result from the still-progressing motion of the ,earth's substance to its centre of gravity2 the antagonistic changes classed as aqueous1 result from the still-progressing motion of the ,sun's substance towards its centre of gravity--a motion which1 transformed into heat and radiated to us1 is here re-transformed1 directly into motions of the gaseous and liquid matters on the ,earth's surface1 and indirectly into motions of the solid matters4 99 99 99 99 99 #ha4 ,that the forces exhibited in vital actions1 vegetal and animal1 are similarly derived1 is so obvious a deduction from the facts of organic chemistry1 that it will meet with ready acceptance from readers acquainted with these facts4 ,let us note first the physiological generalizations2 and then the generalizations which they necessitate4 ,plant-life is all directly or indirectly dependant on the heat and light of the sun--directly dependant in the immense majority of plants1 and indirectly dependant in plants which1 as the fungi1 flourish in the dark3 since these1 growing as they do at the expense of decaying organic matter1 mediately draw their forces from the same original source4 ,each plant owes the carbon and hydrogen of which it mainly consists1 to the carbonic acid and water contained in the surrounding air and earth4 ,the carbonic acid and water must1 however1 be decomposed before their carbon and hydrogen can be assimilated4 ,to overcome the powerful affinities which hold their elements together1 requires the expenditure of force2 and this force is supplied by the ,sun4 ,in what manner the decomposition is effected we do not know4 ,but we know that when1 under fit conditions1 plants are exposed to the ,sun's rays1 they give off oxygen and accumulate carbon and hydrogen4 ,in darkness this process ceases4 ,it ceases too when the quantities of light and heat received are greatly reduced1 as in winter4 ,conversely1 it is active when the light and heat are great1 as in summer4 ,and the like relation is seen in the fact that while plant-life is luxuriant in the tropics1 it diminishes in temperate regions1 and disappears as we approach the poles4 ,thus the irresistible inference is1 that the forces by which plants abstract the materials of their tissues from surrounding inorganic compounds--the forces by which they grow and carry on their functions1 are forces that previously existed as solar radiations4 ,that animal life is immediately or mediately dependant on vegetal life is a familiar truth2 and that1 in the main1 the processes of animal life are opposite to those of vegetal life is a truth long current among men of science4 ,chemically considered1 vegetal life is chiefly a process of de-oxidation1 and animal life chiefly a process of oxidation3 chiefly1 we must say1 because in so far as plants are expenders of force for the purposes of organization1 they are oxidizers 7as is shown by the exhalation of carbonic acid during the night72 and animals1 in some of their minor processes1 are probably de-oxidizers4 ,but with this qualification1 the general truth is that while the plant1 decomposing carbonic acid and water and liberating oxygen1 builds up the detained carbon and hydrogen 7along with a little nitrogen and small quantities of other elements elsewhere obtained7 into branches1 leaves1 and seeds2 the animal1 consuming these branches1 leaves1 and seeds1 and absorbing oxygen1 recomposes carbonic acid and water1 together with certain nitrogenous compounds in minor amounts4 ,and while the decomposition effected by the plant1 is at the expense of certain forces emanating from the sun1 which are employed in overcoming the affinities of carbon and hydrogen for the oxygen united with them2 the recomposition effected by the animal1 is at the profit of these forces1 which are liberated during the combination of such elements4 ,thus the movements1 internal and external1 of the animal1 are re-appearances in new forms of a power absorbed by the plant under the shape of light and heat4 ,just as1 in the manner above explained1 the solar forces expended in raising vapour from the sea's surface1 are given out again in the fall of rain and rivers to the same level1 and in the accompanying transfer of solid matters2 so1 the solar forces that in the plant raised certain chemical elements to a condition of unstable equilibrium1 are given out again in the actions of the animal during the fall of these elements to a condition of stable equilibrium4 ,besides thus tracing a qualitative correlation between these two great orders of organic activity1 as well as between both of them and inorganic agencies1 we may rudely trace a quantitative correlation4 ,where vegetal life is abundant1 we usually find abundant animal life2 and as we advance from torrid to temperate and frigid climates1 the two decrease together4 ,speaking generally1 the animals of each class reach a larger size in regions where vegetation is abundant1 than in those where it is sparse4 ,and further1 there is a tolerably apparent connexion between the quantity of energy which each species of animal expends1 and the quantity of force which the nutriment it absorbs gives out during oxidation4 ,certain phenomena of development in both plants and animals1 illustrate still more directly the ultimate truth enunciated4 ,pursuing the suggestion made by ,mr4 ,grove1 in the first edition of his work on the 8,correlation of the ,physical ,forces10 that a connexion probably exists between the forces classed as vital and those classed as physical1 ,dr4 ,carpenter has pointed out that such a connexion is clearly exhibited during incubation4 ,the transformation of the unorganized contents of an egg into the organized chick1 is altogether a question of heat3 withhold heat and the process does not commence2 supply heat and it goes on while the temperature is maintained1 but ceases when the egg is allowed to cool4 ,the developmental changes can be completed only by keeping the temperature with tolerable constancy at a definite height for a definite time2 that is--only by supplying a definite quantity of heat4 ,in the metamorphoses of insects we may discern parallel facts4 ,experiments show not only that the hatching of their eggs is determined by temperature1 but also that the evolution of the pupa into the imago is similarly determined2 and may be immensely accelerated or retarded according as heat is artificially supplied or withheld4 ,it will suffice just to add that the germination of plants presents like relations of cause and effect--relations so similar that detail is superfluous4 ,thus then the various changes exhibited to us by the organic creation1 whether considered as a whole1 or in its two great divisions1 or in its individual members1 conform1 so far as we can ascertain1 to the law of correlation4 ,where1 as in the transformation of an egg into a chick1 we can investigate the phenomena apart from all complications1 we find that the re-arrangement of parts which constitutes evolution1 involves expenditure of a pre-existing force4 ,where it is not1 as in the egg or the chrysalis1 merely the change of a fixed quantity of matter into a new shape1 but where1 as in the growing plant or animal1 we have an incorporation of matter existing outside1 there is still a pre-existing external force at the cost of which this incorporation is effected4 ,and where1 as in the higher division of organisms1 there remain over and above the forces expended in organization1 certain surplus forces expended in movement1 these too are indirectly derived from this same pre-existing external force4 99 99 99 99 99 #hb4 ,even after all that has been said in the foregoing part of this work1 many will be alarmed by the assertion1 that the forces which we distinguish as mental1 come within the same generalization4 ,yet there is no alternative but to make this assertion3 the facts which justify1 or rather which necessitate it1 being abundant and conspicuous4 ,they fall into the following groups4 ,all impressions from moment to moment made on our organs of sense1 stand in direct correlation with physical forces existing externally4 ,the modes of consciousness called pressure1 motion1 sound1 light1 heat1 are effects produced in us by agencies which1 as otherwise expended1 crush or fracture pieces of matter1 generate vibrations in surrounding objects1 cause chemical combinations1 and reduce substances from a solid to a liquid form4 ,hence if we regard the changes of relative position1 of aggregation1 or of chemical state1 thus arising1 as being transformed manifestations of the agencies from which they arise2 so must we regard the sensations which such agencies produce in us1 as new forms of the forces producing them4 ,any hesitation to admit that1 between the physical forces and the sensations there exists a correlation like that between the physical forces themselves1 must disappear on remembering how the one correlation1 like the other1 is not qualitative only but quantitative4 ,masses of matter which1 by scales or dynamometer1 are shown to differ greatly in weight1 differ as greatly in the feelings of pressure they produce on our bodies4 ,in arresting moving objects1 the strains we are conscious of are proportionate to the momenta of such objects as otherwise measured4 ,under like conditions the impressions of sounds given to us by vibrating strings1 bells1 or columns of air1 are found to vary in strength with the amount of force applied4 ,fluids or solids proved to be markedly contrasted in temperature by the different degrees of expansion they produce in the mercurial column1 produce in us correspondingly different degrees of the sensation of heat4 ,and similarly unlike intensities in our impressions of light1 answer to unlike effects as measured by photometers4 ,besides the correlation and equivalence between external physical forces1 and the mental forces generated by them in us under the form of sensations1 there is a correlation and equivalence between sensations and those physical forces which1 in the shape of bodily actions1 result from them4 ,the feelings we distinguish as light1 heat1 sound1 odour1 taste1 pressure1 4c1 do not die away without immediate results2 but are invariably followed by other manifestations of force4 ,in addition to the excitements of secreting organs1 that are in some cases traceable1 there arises a contraction of the involuntary muscles1 or of the voluntary muscles1 or of both4 ,sensations increase the action of the heart--slightly when they are slight2 markedly when they are marked2 and recent physiological inquiries imply not only that contraction of the heart is excited by every sensation1 but also that the muscular fibres throughout the whole1 vascular system1 are at the same time more or less contracted4 ,the respiratory muscles1 too1 are stimulated into greater activity by sensations4 ,the rate of breathing is visibly and audibly augmented both by pleasurable and painful impressions on the nerves1 when these reach any intensity4 ,it has even of late been shown that inspiration becomes more frequent on transition from darkness into sunshine1--a result probably due to the increased amount of direct and indirect nervous stimulation involved4 ,when the quantity of sensation is great1 it generates contractions of the voluntary muscles1 as well as of the involuntary ones4 ,unusual excitement of the nerves of touch1 as by tickling1 is followed by almost incontrollable movements of the limbs4 ,violent pains cause violent struggles4 ,the start that succeeds a loud sound1 the wry face produced by the taste of anything extremely disagreeable1 the jerk with which the hand or foot is snatched out of water that is very hot1 are instances of the transformation of feeling3 into motion2 and in these cases1 as in all others1 it is manifest that the quantity of bodily action is proportionate to the quantity of sensation4 ,even where from pride there is a suppression of the screams and groans expressive of great pain 7also indirect results of muscular contraction71 we may still see in the clenching of the hands1 the knitting of the brows1 and the setting of the teeth1 that the bodily actions developed are as great1 though less obtrusive in their results4 ,if we take emotions instead of sensations1 we find the correlation and equivalence equally manifest4 ,not only are the modes of consciousness directly produced in us by physical forces1 re-transformable into physical forces under the form of muscular motions and the changes they initiate2 but the like is true of those modes of consciousness which are not directly produced in us by the physical forces4 ,emotions of moderate intensity1 like sensations of moderate intensity1 generate little beyond excitement of the heart and vascular system1 joined sometimes with increased action of glandular organs4 ,but as the emotions rise in strength1 the muscles of the face1 body1 and limbs1 begin to move4 ,of examples may be mentioned the frowns1 dilated nostrils1 and stampings of anger2 the contracted brows1 and wrung hands1 of grief2 the smiles and leaps of joy2 and the frantic struggles of terror or despair4 ,passing over certain apparent1 but only apparent1 exceptions1 we see that whatever be the kind of emotion1 there is a manifest relation between its amount1 and the amount of muscular action induced3 alike from the erect carriage and elastic step of exhilaration1 up to the dancings of immense delight1 and from the fidgetiness of impatience up to the almost convulsive movements accompanying great mental agony4 ,to these several orders of evidence must be joined the further one1 that between our feelings and those voluntary motions into which they are transformed1 there comes the sensation of muscular tension1 standing in manifest correlation with both--a correlation that is distinctly quantitative3 the sense of strain varying1 other things equal1 directly as the quantity of momentum generated4 8,but how10 it may be asked1 8can we interpret by the law of correlation the genesis of those thoughts and feelings which1 instead of following external stimuli1 arise spontaneously8 ,between the indignation caused by an insult1 and the loud sounds or violent acts that follow1 the alleged connexion may hold2 but whence come the crowd of ideas and the mass of feelings that expend themselves in these demonstrations8 ,they are clearly not equivalents of the sensations produced by the words on the ears2 for the same words otherwise arranged1 would not have caused them4 ,the thing said bears to the mental action it excites1 much the same relation that the pulling of a trigger bears to the subsequent explosion--does not produce the power1 but merely liberates it4 ,whence then arises this immense amount of nervous energy which a whisper or a glance may call forth80 ,the reply is1 that the immediate correlates of these and other such modes of consciousness1 are not to be found in the agencies acting on us externally1 but in certain internal agencies4 ,the forces called vital1 which we have seen to be correlates of the forces called physical1 are the immediate sources of these thoughts and feelings2 and are expended in producing them4 ,the proofs of this are various4 ,here are some of them4 ,it is a conspicuous fact that mental action is contingent on the presence of a certain nervous apparatus2 and that1 greatly obscured as it is by numerous and involved conditions1 a general relation may be traced between the size of this apparatus and the quantity of mental action as measured by its results4 ,further1 this apparatus has a particular chemical constitution on which its activity depends2 and there is one element in it between the amount of which and the amount of function performed1 there is an ascertained connexion3 the proportion of phosphorus present in the brain being the smallest in infancy1 old age and idiotcy1 and the greatest during the prime of life4 ,note next1 that the evolution of thought and emotion varies1 other things equal1 with the supply of blood to the brain4 ,on the one hand1 a cessation of the cerebral circulation1 from arrest of the heart's action1 immediately entails unconsciousness4 ,on the other hand1 excess of cerebral circulation 7unless it is such as to cause undue pressure7 results in an excitement rising finally to delirium4 ,not the quantity only1 but also the condition of the blood passing through the nervous system1 influences the mental manifestations4 ,the arterial currents must be duly aerated1 to produce the normal amount of cerebration4 ,at the one extreme1 we find that if the blood is not allowed to exchange its carbonic acid for oxygen1 there results asphyxia1 with its accompanying stoppage of ideas and feelings4 ,while at the other extreme1 we find that by the inspiration of nitrous oxide1 there is produced an excessive1 and indeed irrepressible1 nervous activity4 ,besides the connexion between the development of the mental forces and the presence of sufficient oxygen in the cerebral arteries1 there is a kindred connexion between the development of the mental forces and the presence in the cerebral arteries of certain other elements4 ,there must be supplied special materials for the nutrition of the nervous centres1 as well as for their oxidation4 ,and how what we may call the quantity of consciousness1 is1 other things equal1 determined by the constituents of the blood1 is unmistakably seen in the exaltation that follows when certain chemical compounds1 as alcohol and the vegeto-alkalies1 are added to it4 ,the gentle exhilaration which tea and coffee create1 is familiar to all2 and though the gorgeous imaginations and intense feelings of happiness produced by opium and hashish1 have been experienced by few1 7in this country at least17 the testimony of those who have experienced them is sufficiently conclusive4 ,yet another proof that the genesis of the mental energies is immediately dependent on chemical change1 is afforded by the fact1 that the effete products separated from the blood by the kidneys1 vary in character with the amount of cerebral action4 ,excessive activity of mind is habitually accompanied by the excretion of an unusual quantity of the alkaline phosphates4 ,conditions of abnormal nervous excitement bring on analogous effects4 ,and the 8peculiar odour of the insane10 implying as it does morbid products in the perspiration1 shows a connexion between insanity and a special composition of the circulating fluids--a composition which1 whether regarded as cause or consequence1 equally implies correlation of the mental and the physical forces4 ,lastly we have to note that this correlation too1 is1 so far as we can trace it1 quantitative4 ,provided the conditions to nervous action are not infringed on1 and the concomitants are the same1 there is a tolerably constant ratio between the amounts of the antecedents and consequents4 ,within the implied limits1 nervous stimulants and ansthetics produce effects on the thoughts and feelings1 proportionate to the quantities administered4 ,and conversely1 where the thoughts and feelings form the initial term of the relation1 the degree of reaction on the bodily energies is great1 in proportion as they are great3 reaching in extreme cases a total prostration of physique4 ,various classes of facts thus unite to prove that the law of metamorphosis1 which holds among the physical forces1 holds equally between them and the mental forces4 ,those modes of the ,unknowable which we call motion1 heat1 light1 chemical affinity1 c41 are alike transformable into each other1 and into those modes of the ,unknowable which we distinguish as sensation1 emotion1 thought3 these1 in their turns1 being directly or indirectly re-transformable into the original shapes4 ,that no idea or feeling arises1 save as a result of some physical force expended in producing it1 is fast becoming a common place of science2 and whoever duly weighs the evidence will see1 that nothing but an overwhelming bias in favour of a pre-conceived theory1 can explain its non-acceptance4 ,how this metamorphosis takes place--how a force existing as motion1 heat1 or light1 can become a mode of consciousness--how it is possible for aerial vibrations to generate the sensation we call sound1 or for the forces liberated by chemical changes in the brain to give rise to emotion--these are mysteries which it is impossible to fathom4 ,but they are not profounder mysteries than the transformations of the physical forces into each other4 ,they are not more completely beyond our comprehension than the natures of ,mind and ,matter4 ,they have simply the same insolubility as all other ultimate questions4 ,we can learn nothing more than that here is one of the uniformities in the order of phenomena4 99 99 99 99 99 #hc4 ,of course if the law of correlation and equivalence holds of the forces we class as vital and mental1 it must hold also of those which we class as social4 ,whatever takes place in a society is due to organic or inorganic agencies1 or to a combination of the two--results either from the undirected physical forces around1 from these physical forces as directed by men1 or from the forces of the men themselves4 ,no change can occur in its organization1 its modes of activity1 or the effects it produces on the face of the ,earth1 but what proceeds1 mediately or immediately1 from these4 ,let us consider first the correlation between the phenomena which societies display1 and the vital phenomena4 ,social power and life varies1 other things equal1 with the population4 ,though different races1 differing widely in their fitness for combination1 show us that the forces manifested in a society are not necessarily proportionate to the number of people2 yet we see that under given conditions1 the forces manifested are confined within the limits which the number of people imposes4 ,a small society1 no matter how superior the character of its members1 cannot exhibit the same quantity of social action as a large one4 ,the production and distribution of commodities must be on a comparatively small scale4 ,a multitudinous press1 a prolific literature1 or a massive political agitation1 is not possible4 ,and there can be but a small total of results in the shape of art-products and scientific discoveries4 ,the correlation of the social with the physical forces through the intermediation of the vital ones1 is1 however1 most clearly shown in the different amounts of activity displayed by the same society according as its members are supplied with different amounts of force from the external world4 ,in the effects of good and bad harvests1 we yearly see this relation illustrated4 ,a greatly deficient yield of wheat is soon followed by a diminution of business4 ,factories are worked half-time1 or close entirely2 railway traffic falls2 retailers find their sales much lessened2 house-building is almost suspended2 and if the scarcity rises to famine1 a thinning of the population still more diminishes the industrial vivacity4 ,conversely1 an unusually abundant harvest1 occurring under conditions not otherwise unfavourable1 both excites the old producing and distributing agencies and sets up new ones4 ,the surplus social energy finds vent in speculative enterprises4 ,capital seeking investment carries out inventions that have been lying unutilized4 ,labour is expended in opening new channels of communication4 ,there is increased encouragement to those who furnish the luxuries of life and minister to the sthetic faculties4 ,there are more marriages1 and a greater rate of increase in population4 ,thus the social organism grows larger1 more complex1 and more active4 ,when1 as happens with most civilized nations1 the whole of the materials for subsistence are not drawn from the area inhabited1 but are partly imported1 the people are still supported by certain harvests elsewhere grown at the expense of certain physical forces4 ,our own cotton-spinners and weavers supply the most conspicuous instance of a section in one nation living1 in great part1 on imported commodities1 purchased by the labour they expend on other imported commodities4 ,but though the social activities of ,lancashire are due chiefly to materials not drawn from our own soil1 they are none the less evolved from physical forces elsewhere stored up in fit forms and then brought here4 ,if we ask whence come these physical forces from which1 through the intermediation of the vital forces1 the social forces arise1 the reply is of course as heretofore--the solar radiations4 ,based as the life of a society is on animal and vegetal products2 and dependent as these animal and vegetal products are on the light and heat of the sun2 it follows that the changes going on in societies are effects of forces having a common origin with those which produce all the other orders of changes that have been analyzed4 ,not only is the force expended by the horse harnessed to the plough1 and by the labourer guiding it1 derived from the same reservoir as is the force of the falling cataract and the roaring hurricane2 but to this same reservoir are eventually traceable those subtler and more complex manifestations of force which humanity1 as socially embodied1 evolves4 ,the assertion is a startling one1 and by many will be thought ludicrous2 but it is an unavoidable deduction which cannot here be passed over4 ,of the physical forces that are directly transformed into social ones1 the like is to be said4 ,currents of air and water1 which before the use of steam were the only agencies brought in aid of muscular effort for the performance of industrial processes1 are1 as we have seen1 generated by the heat of the sun4 ,and the inanimate power that now1 to so vast an extent1 supplements human labour1 is similarly derived4 ,the late ,george ,stephenson was one of the first to recognize the fact that the force impelling his locomotive1 originally emanated from the sun4 ,step by step we go back--from the motion of the piston to the evaporation of the water2 thence to the heat evolved during the oxidation of coal2 thence to the assimilation of carbon by the plants of whose imbedded remains coal consists2 thence to the carbonic acid from which their carbon was obtained2 and thence to the rays of light that de-oxidized this carbonic acid4 ,solar forces millions of years ago expended on the ,earth's vegetation1 and since locked up beneath its surface1 now smelt the metals required for our machines1 turn the lathes by which the machines are shaped1 work them when put together1 and distribute the fabrics they produce4 ,and in so far as economy of labour makes possible the support of a larger population2 gives a surplus of human power that would else be absorbed in manual occupations2 and so facilitates the development of higher kinds of activity2 it is clear that these social forces which are directly correlated with physical forces anciently derived from the sun1 are only less important than those whose correlates are the vital forces recently derived from it4 99 99 99 99 99 #hd4 ,regarded as an induction1 the doctrine set forth in this chapter will most likely be met by a demurrer4 ,many who admit that among physical phenomena at least1 the correlation of forces is now established1 will probably say that inquiry has not yet gone far enough to enable us to predicate equivalence4 ,and in respect of the forces classed as vital1 mental1 and social1 the evidence assigned1 however little to be explained away1 they will consider by no means conclusive even of correlation1 much less of equivalence4 ,to those who think thus1 it must now however be pointed out1 that the universal truth above illustrated under its various aspects1 is a necessary corollary from the persistence of force4 ,setting out with the proposition that force can neither come into existence1 nor cease to exist1 the several foregoing general conclusions inevitably follow4 ,each manifestation of force can be interpreted only as the effect of some antecedent force3 no matter whether it be an inorganic action1 an animal movement1 a thought1 or a feeling4 ,either this must be conceded1 or else it must be asserted that our successive states of consciousness are self-created4 ,either mental energies1 as well as bodily ones1 are quantitatively correlated to certain energies expended in their production1 and to certain other energies which they initiate2 or else nothing must become something and something must become nothing4 ,the alternatives are1 to deny the persistence of force1 or to admit that every physical and psychial change is generated by certain antecedent forces1 and that from given amounts of such forces neither more nor less of such physical and psychial changes can result4 ,and since the persistence of force1 being a datum of consciousness1 cannot be denied1 its unavoidable corollary must be accepted4 ,this corollary cannot indeed be made more certain by accumulating illustrations4 ,the truth as arrived at deductively1 cannot be inductively confirmed4 ,for every one of such facts as those above detailed1 is established only through the indirect assumption of that persistence of force1 from which it really follows as a direct consequence4 ,the most exact proof of correlation and equivalence which it is possible to reach by experimental inquiry1 is that based on measurement of the forces expended and the forces produced4 ,but1 as was shown in the last chapter1 any such process of measurement implies the use of some unit of force which is assumed to remain constant2 and for this assumption there can be no warrant but that it is a corollary from the persistence of force4 ,how then can any reasoning based on this corollary1 prove the equally direct corollary that when a given quantity of force ceases to exist under one form1 an equal quantity must come into existence under some other form or forms8 ,clearly the priori truth expressed in this last corollary1 cannot be more firmly established by any posteriori proofs which the first corollary helps us to4 8,what then10 it may be asked1 8is the use of these investigations by which the correlation and equivalence of forces is sought to be established as an inductive truth8 ,surely it will not be alleged that they are useless4 ,yet if this correlation cannot be made more certain by them than it is already1 does not their uselessness necessarily follow80 ,no4 ,they are of value as disclosing the many particular implications which the general truth does not specify4 ,they are of value as teaching us how much of one mode of force is the equivalent of so much of another mode4 ,they are of value as determining under what conditions each metamorphosis occurs4 ,and they are of value as leading us to inquire in what shape the remnant of force has escaped1 when the apparent results are not equivalent to the cause4 ,,chapter ,x4 ,,the ,,direction ,,of ,,motion4 #he4 ,the ,absolute ,cause of changes1 inclusive of those constituting ,evolution1 is not less incomprehensible in respect of the unity or duality of its action1 than in all other respects4 ,we cannot decide between the alternative suppositions1 that phenomena are due to the variously-conditioned workings of a single force1 and that they are due to the conflict of two forces4 ,whether1 as some contend1 everything is explicable on the hypothesis of universal pressure1 whence what we call tension results differentially from inequalities of pressure in opposite directions2 or whether1 as might be with equal propriety contended1 things are to be explained on the hypothesis of universal tension1 from which pressure is a differential result2 or whether1 as most physicists hold1 pressure and tension everywhere co-exist2 are questions which it is impossible to settle4 ,each of these three suppositions makes the facts comprehensible1 only by postulating an inconceivability4 ,to assume a universal pressure1 confessedly requires us to assume an infinite plenum--an unlimited space full of something which is everywhere pressed by something beyond2 and this assumption cannot be mentally realized4 ,that universal tension is the immediate agency to which phenomena are due1 is an idea open to a parallel and equally fatal objection4 ,and however verbally intelligible may be the proposition that pressure and tension everywhere co-exist1 yet we cannot truly represent to ourselves one ultimate unit of matter as drawing another while resisting it4 ,nevertheless1 this last belief is one which we are compelled to entertain4 ,matter cannot be conceived except as manifesting forces of attraction and repulsion4 ,body is distinguished in our consciousness from ,space1 by its opposition to our muscular energies2 and this opposition we feel under the two-fold form of a cohesion that hinders our efforts to rend1 and a resistance that hinders our efforts to compress4 ,without resistance there can be merely empty extension4 ,without cohesion there can be no resistance4 ,probably this conception of antagonistic forces1 is originally derived from the antagonism of our flexor and extensor muscles4 ,but be this as it may1 we are obliged to think of all objects as made up of parts that attract and repel each other2 since this is the form of our experience of all objects4 ,by a higher abstraction results the conception of attractive and repulsive forces pervading space4 ,we cannot dissociate force from occupied extension1 or occupied extension from force2 because we have never an immediate consciousness of either in the absence of the other4 ,nevertheless1 we have abundant proof that force is exercised through what appears to our senses a vacuity4 ,mentally to represent this exercise1 we are hence obliged to fill the apparent vacuity with a species of matter--an etherial medium4 ,the constitution we assign to this etherial medium1 however1 like the constitution we assign to solid substance1 is necessarily an abstract of the impressions received from tangible bodies4 ,the opposition to pressure which a tangible body offers to us1 is not shown in one direction only1 but in all directions2 and so likewise is its tenacity4 ,suppose countless lines radiating from its centre on every side1 and it resists along each of these lines and coheres along each of these lines4 ,hence the constitution of those ultimate units through the instrumentality of which phenomena are interpreted4 ,be they atoms of ponderable matter or molecules of ether1 the properties we conceive them to possess are nothing else than these perceptible properties idealized4 ,centres of force attracting and repelling each other in all directions1 are simply insensible portions of matter having the endowments common to sensible portions of matter--endowments of which we cannot by any mental effort divest them4 ,in brief1 they are the invariable elements of the conception of matter1 abstracted from its variable elements--size1 form1 quality1 c4 ,and so to interpret manifestations of force which cannot be tactually experienced1 we use the terms of thought supplied by our tactual experiences2 and this for the sufficient reason that we must use these or none4 ,after all that has been before shown1 and after the hint given above1 it needs scarcely be said that these universally co-existent forces of attraction and repulsion1 must not be taken as realities1 but as our symbols of the reality4 ,they are the forms under which the workings of the ,unknowable are cognizable by us--modes of the ,unconditioned as presented under the conditions of our consciousness4 ,but while knowing that the ideas thus generated in us are not absolutely true1 we may unreservedly surrender ourselves to them as relatively true2 and may proceed to evolve a series of deductions having a like relative truth4 99 99 99 99 99 #hf4 ,from universally co-existent forces of attraction and repulsion1 there result certain laws of direction of all movement4 ,where attractive forces alone are concerned1 or rather are alone appreciable1 movement takes place in the direction of their resultant2 which may1 in a sense1 be called the line of greatest traction4 ,where repulsive forces alone are concerned1 or rather are alone appreciable1 movement takes place along their resultant2 which is usually known as the line of least resistance4 ,and where both attractive and repulsive forces are concerned1 or are appreciable1 movement takes place along the resultant of all the tractions and resistances4 ,strictly speaking1 this last is the sole law2 since1 by the hypothesis1 both forces are everywhere in action4 ,but very frequently the one kind of force is so immensely in excess that the effect of the other kind may be left out of consideration4 ,practically we may say that a body falling to the ,earth1 follows the line of greatest traction2 since1 though the resistance of the air must1 if the body be irregular1 cause some divergence from this line1 7quite perceptible with feathers and leaves17 yet ordinarily the divergence is so slight that we may omit it4 ,in the same manner1 though the course taken by the steam from an exploding boiler1 differs somewhat from that which it would take were gravitation out of the question2 yet1 as gravitation affects its course infinitesimally1 we are justified in asserting that the escaping steam follows the line of least resistance4 ,motion then1 we may say1 always follows the line of greatest traction1 or the line of least resistance1 or the resultant of the two3 bearing in mind that though the last is alone strictly true1 the others are in many cases sufficiently near the truth for practical purposes4 ,movement set up in any direction is itself a cause of further movement in that direction1 since it is the embodiment of a surplus force in that direction4 ,this holds equally with the transit of matter through space1 the transit of matter through matter1 and the transit through matter of any kind of vibration4 ,in the case of matter moving through space1 this principle is expressed in the law of inertia--a law on which the calculations of physical astronomy are wholly based4 ,in the case of matter moving through matter1 we trace the same truth under the familiar experience that any breach made by one solid through another1 or any channel formed by a fluid through a solid1 becomes a route along which1 other things equal1 subsequent movements of like nature take place4 ,and in the case of motion passing through matter under the form of an impulse communicated from part to part1 the facts of magnetization go to show that the establishment of undulations along certain lines1 determines their continuance along those lines4 ,it further follows from the conditions1 that the direction of movement can rarely if ever be perfectly straight4 ,for matter in motion to pursue continuously the exact line in which it sets out1 the forces of attraction and repulsion must be symmetrically disposed around its path2 and the chances against this are infinitely great4 ,the impossibility of making an absolutely true edge to a bar of metal--the fact that all which can be done by the best mechanical appliances1 is to reduce the irregularities of such an edge to amounts that cannot be perceived without magnifiers--sufficiently exemplifies how1 in consequence of the unsymmetrical distribution of forces around the line of movement1 the movement is rendered more or less indirect4 ,it may be well to add that in proportion as the forces at work are numerous and varied1 the curve a moving body describes is necessarily complex3 witness the contrast between the flight of an arrow and the gyrations of a stick tossed about by breakers4 ,we have now to trace these laws of direction of movement throughout the process of ,evolution1 under its various forms4 ,we have to note how every change in the arrangement of parts1 takes place along the line of greatest traction1 of least resistance1 or of their resultant2 how the setting up of motion along a certain line1 becomes a cause of its continuance along that line2 how1 nevertheless1 change of relations to external forces1 always renders this line indirect2 and how the degree of its indirectness increases with every addition to the number of influences at work4 99 99 99 99 99 #hg4 ,if we assume the first stage in nebular condensation to be the precipitation into flocculi of denser matter previously diffused through a rarer medium1 7a supposition both physically justified1 and in harmony with certain astronomical observations17 we shall find that nebular motion is interpretable in pursuance of the above general laws4 ,each portion of such vapour-like matter must begin to move towards the common centre of gravity4 ,the tractive forces which would of themselves carry it in a straight line to the centre of gravity1 are opposed by the resistant forces of the medium through which it is drawn4 ,the direction of movement must be the resultant of these--a resultant which1 in consequence of the unsymmetrical form of the flocculus1 must be a curve directed1 not to the centre of gravity1 but towards one side of it4 ,and it may be readily shown that in an aggregation of such flocculi1 severally thus moving1 there must1 by composition of forces1 eventually result a rotation of the whole nebula in one direction4 ,merely noting this hypothetical illustration for the purpose of showing how the law applies to the case of nebular evolution1 supposing it to have taken place1 let us pass to the phenomena of the ,solar ,system as now exhibited4 ,here the general principles above set forth are every instant exemplified4 ,each planet and satellite has a momentum which would1 if acting alone1 carry it forward in the direction it is at any instant pursuing4 ,this momentum hence acts as a resistance to motion in any other direction4 ,each planet and satellite1 however1 is drawn by a force which1 if unopposed1 would take it in a straight line towards its primary4 ,and the resultant of these two forces is that curve which it describes--a curve manifestly consequent on the unsymmetrical distribution of the forces around its path4 ,this path1 when more closely examined1 supplies us with further illustrations4 ,for it is not an exact circle or ellipse2 which it would be were the tangential and centripetal forces the only ones concerned4 ,adjacent members of the ,solar ,system1 ever varying in their relative positions1 cause what we call perturbations2 that is1 slight divergences in various directions from that circle or ellipse which the two chief forces would produce4 ,these perturbations severally show us in minor degrees1 how the line of movement is the resultant of all the forces engaged2 and how this line becomes more complicated in proportion as the forces are multiplied4 ,if instead of the motions of the planets and satellites as wholes1 we consider the motions of their parts1 we meet with comparatively complex illustrations4 ,every portion of the ,earth's substance in its daily rotation1 describes a curve which is in the main a resultant of that resistance which checks its nearer approach to the centre of gravity1 that momentum which would carry it off at a tangent1 and those forces of gravitation and cohesion which keep it from being so carried off4 ,if this axial motion be compounded with the orbital motion1 the course of each part is seen to be a much more involved one4 ,and we find it to have a still greater complication on taking into account that lunar attraction which mainly produces the tides and the precession of the equinoxes4 99 99 99 99 99 #hh4 ,we come next to terrestrial changes3 present ones as observed1 and past ones as inferred by geologists4 ,let us set out with the hourly-occurring alterations in the ,earth's atmosphere2 descend to the slower alterations in progress on its surface2 and then to the still slower ones going on beneath4 ,masses of air1 absorbing heat from surfaces warmed by the sun1 expand1 and so lessen the weight of the atmospheric columns of which they are parts4 ,hence they offer to adjacent atmospheric columns1 diminished lateral resistance2 and these1 moving in the directions of the diminished resistance1 displace the expanded air2 while this1 pursuing an upward course1 displays a motion along that line in which there is least pressure4 ,when again1 by the ascent of such heated masses from extended areas like the torrid zone1 there is produced at the upper surface of the atmosphere1 a protuberance beyond the limits of equilibrium--when the air forming this protuberance begins to overflow laterally towards the poles2 it does so because1 while the tractive force of the ,earth is nearly the same1 the lateral resistance is greatly diminished4 ,and throughout the course of each current thus generated1 as well as throughout the course of each counter-current flowing3 into the vacuum that is left1 the direction is always the resultant of the ,earth's tractive force and the resistance offered by the surrounding masses of air3 modified only by conflict with other currents similarly determined1 and by collision with prominences on the ,earth's crust4 ,the movements of water1 in both its gaseous and liquid states1 furnish further examples4 ,in conformity with the mechanical theory of heat1 it may be shown that evaporation is the escape of particles of water in the direction of least resistance2 and that as the resistance 7which is due to the pressure of the water diffused in a gaseous state7 diminishes1 the evaporation increases4 ,conversely1 that rushing together of particles called condensation1 which takes place when any portion of atmospheric vapour has its temperature much lowered1 may be interpreted as a diminution of the mutual pressure among the condensing particles1 while the pressure of surrounding particles remains the same2 and so is a motion taking place in the direction of lessened resistance4 ,in the course followed by the resulting rain-drops1 we have one of the simplest instances of the joint effect of the two antagonist forces4 ,the ,earth's attraction1 and the resistance of atmospheric currents ever varying in direction and intensity1 give as their resultants1 lines which incline to the horizon in countless different degrees and undergo perpetual variations4 ,more clearly still is the law exemplified by these same rain-drops when they reach the ground4 ,in the course they take while trickling over its surface1 in every rill1 in every larger stream1 and in every river1 we see them descending as straight as the antagonism of surrounding objects permits4 ,from moment to moment1 the motion of water towards the ,earth's centre is opposed by the solid matter around and under it2 and from moment to moment its route is the resultant of the lines of greatest traction and least resistance4 ,so far from a cascade furnishing1 as it seems to do1 an exception1 it furnishes but another illustration4 ,for though all solid obstacles to a vertical fall of the water are removed1 yet the water's horizontal momentum is an obstacle2 and the parabola in which the stream leaps from the projecting ledge1 is generated by the combined gravitation and momentum4 ,it may be well just to draw attention to the degree of complexity here produced in the line of movement by the variety of forces at work4 ,in atmospheric currents1 and still more clearly in water-courses 7to which might be added ocean-streams71 the route followed is too complex to be defined1 save as a curve of three dimensions with an ever varying equation4 ,the ,earth's solid crust undergoes changes that supply another group of illustrations4 ,the denudation of lands and the depositing of the removed sediment in new strata at the bottoms of seas and lakes1 is a process throughout which motion is obviously determined in the same way as is that of the water effecting the transport4 ,again1 though we have no direct inductive proof that the forces classed as igneous1 expend themselves along lines of least resistance2 yet what little we know of them is in harmony with the belief that they do so4 ,earthquakes continually revisit the same localities1 and special tracts undergo for long periods together successive elevations or subsidences1--facts which imply that already-fractured portions of the ,earth's crust are those most prone to yield under the pressure caused by further contractions4 ,the distribution of volcanoes along certain lines1 as well as the frequent recurrence of eruptions from the same vents1 are facts of like meaning4 99 99 99 99 99 #hi4 ,that organic growth takes place in the direction of least resistance1 is a proposition that has been set forth and illustrated by ,mr4 ,james ,hinton1 in the ,medico-,chirurgical ,review for ,october1 #aheh4 ,after detailing a few of the early observations which led him to this generalization1 he formulates it thus3-- 8,organic form is the result of motion40 8,motion takes the direction of least resistance40 8,therefore organic form is the result of motion in the direction of least resistance40 ,after an elucidation and defence of this position1 ,mr4 ,hinton proceeds to interpret1 in conformity with it1 sundry phenomena of development4 ,speaking of plants he says3-- 8,the formation of the root furnishes a beautiful illustration of the law of least resistance1 for it grows by insinuating itself1 cell by cell1 through the interstices of the soil2 it is by such minute additions that it increases1 winding and twisting whithersoever the obstacles it meets in its path determine1 and growing there most1 where the nutritive materials are added to it most abundantly4 ,as we look on the roots of a mighty tree1 it appears to us as if they had forced themselves with giant violence into the solid earth4 ,but it is not so2 they were led on gently1 cell added to cell1 softly as the dews descended1 and the loosened earth made way4 ,once formed1 indeed1 they expand with an enormous power1 but the spongy condition of the growing radicles utterly forbids the supposition that they are forced into the earth4 ,is it not probable1 indeed1 that the enlargement of the roots already formed may crack the surrounding soil1 and help to make the interstices into which the new rootlets grow80 99 99 99 8,throughout almost the whole of organic nature the spiral form is more or less distinctly marked4 ,now1 motion under resistance takes a spiral direction1 as may be seen by the motion of a body rising or falling through water4 ,a bubble rising rapidly in water describes a spiral closely resembling a corkscrew1 and a body of moderate specific gravity dropped into water may be seen to fall in a curved direction1 the spiral tendency of which may be distinctly observed4 99 99 99 ,in this prevailing spiral form of organic bodies1 therefore1 it appears to me1 that there is presented a strong prima facie case for the view ,i have maintained4 99 99 99 ,the spiral form of the branches of many trees is very apparent1 and the universally spiral arrangement of the leaves around the stem of plants needs only to be referred to4 99 99 99 ,the heart commences as a spiral turn1 and in its perfect form a manifest spiral may be traced through the left ventricle1 right ventricle1 right auricle1 left auricle and appendix4 ,and what is the spiral turn in which the heart commences but a necessary result of the lengthening1 under a limit1 of the cellular mass of which it then consists80 99 99 99 8,every one must have noticed the peculiar curling up of the young leaves of the common fern4 ,the appearance is as if the leaf were rolled up1 but in truth this form is merely a phenomenon of growth4 ,the curvature results from the increase of the leaf1 it is only another form of the wrinkling up1 or turning at right angles by extension under limit40 8,the rolling up or imbrication of the petals in many flower-buds is a similar thing2 at an early period the small petals may be seen lying side by side1 afterwards growing within the capsule1 they become folded round one another40 99 99 99 8,if a flower-bud be opened at a sufficiently early period1 the stamens will be found as if moulded in the cavity between the pistil and the corolla1 which cavity the antlers exactly fill2 the stalks lengthen at an after period4 ,i have noticed also in a few instances1 that in those flowers in which the petals are imbricated1 or twisted together1 the pistil is tapering as growing up between the petals2 in some flowers which have the petals so arranged in the bud as to form a dome 7as the hawthorn2 e4 g471 the pistil is flattened at the apex1 and in the bud occupies a space precisely limited by the stamens below1 and the enclosing petals above and at the sides4 ,i have not1 however1 satisfied myself that this holds good in all cases40 ,without endorsing all ,mr4 ,hinton's illustrations1 to some of which exception might be taken1 his conclusion may be accepted as a large instalment of the truth4 ,it is1 however1 to be remarked1 that in the case of organic growth1 as in all other cases1 the line of movement is in strictness the resultant of tractive and resistant forces2 and that the tractive forces here form so considerable an element that the formula is scarcely complete without them4 ,the shapes of plants are manifestly modified by gravitation3 the direction of each branch is not what it would have been were the tractive force of the ,earth absent2 and every flower and leaf is somewhat altered in the course of development by the weight of its parts4 ,though in animals such effects are less conspicuous1 yet the instances in which flexible organs have their directions in great measure determined by gravity1 justify the assertion that throughout the whole organism the forms of parts must be affected by this force4 ,the organic movements which constitute growth1 are not1 however1 the only organic movements to be interpreted4 ,there are also those which constitute function4 ,and throughout these the same general principles are discernible4 ,that the vessels along which blood1 lymph1 bile1 and all the secretions1 find their ways1 are channels of least resistance1 is a fact almost too conspicuous to be named as an illustration4 ,less conspicuous1 however1 is the truth1 that the currents setting along these vessels are affected by the tractive force of the ,earth3 witness varicose veins2 witness the relief to an inflamed part obtained by raising it2 witness the congestion of head and face produced by stooping4 ,and in the fact that dropsy in the legs gets greater by day and decreases at night1 while1 conversely1 that dematous fullness under the eyes common in debility1 grows worse during the hours of reclining and decreases after getting up1 shows us how the transudation of fluid through the walls of the capillaries1 varies according as change of position changes the effect of gravity in different parts of the body4 ,it may be well in passing just to note the bearing of the principle on the development of species4 ,from a dynamic point of view1 8natural selection0 is the evolution of ,life along lines of least resistance4 ,the multiplication of any kind of plant or animal in localities that are favourable to it1 is a growth where the antagonistic forces are less than elsewhere4 ,and the preservation of varieties that succeed better than their allies in coping with surrounding conditions1 is the continuance of vital movement in those directions where the obstacles to it are most eluded4 99 99 99 99 99 #ij4 ,throughout the phenomena of mind the law enunciated is not so readily established4 ,in a large part of them1 as those of thought and emotion1 there is no perceptible movement4 ,even in sensation and volition1 which show us in one part of the body an effect produced by a force applied to another part1 the intermediate movement is inferential rather than visible4 ,such indeed are the difficulties that it is not possible here to do more than briefly indicate the proofs which might be given did space permit4 ,supposing the various forces throughout an organism to be previously in equilibrium1 then any part which becomes the seat of a further force1 added or liberated1 must be one from which the force1 being resisted by smaller forces around1 will initiate motion towards some other part of the organism4 ,if elsewhere in the organism there is a point at which force is being expended1 and which so is becoming minus a force which it before had1 instead of plus a force which it before had not1 and thus is made a point at which the re-action against surrounding forces is diminished2 then1 manifestly1 a motion taking place between the first and the last of these points is a motion along the line of least resistance4 ,now a sensation implies a force added to1 or evolved in1 that part of the organism which is its seat2 while a mechanical movement implies an expenditure or loss of force in that part of the organism which is its seat4 ,hence if1 as we find to be the fact1 motion is habitually propagated from those parts of an organism to which the external world adds forces in the shape of nervous impressions1 to those parts of an organism which react on the external world through muscular contractions1 it is simply a fulfilment of the law above enunciated4 ,from this general conclusion we may pass to a more special one4 ,when there is anything in the circumstances of an animal's life1 involving that a sensation in one particular place is habitually followed by a contraction in another particular place--when there is thus a frequently-repeated motion through the organism between these places2 what must be the result as respects the line along which the motions take place8 ,restoration of equilibrium between the points at which the forces have been increased and decreased1 must take place through some channel4 ,if this channel is affected by the discharge--if the obstructive action of the tissues traversed1 involves any reaction upon them1 deducting from their obstructive power2 then a subsequent motion between these two points will meet with less resistance along this channel than the previous motion met with2 and will consequently take this channel still more decidedly4 ,if so1 every repetition will still further diminish the resistance offered by this route2 and hence will gradually be formed between the two a permanent line of communication1 differing greatly from the surrounding tissue in respect of the ease with which force traverses it4 ,we see1 therefore1 that if between a particular impression and a particular motion associated with it1 there is established a connexion producing what is called reflex action1 the law that motion follows the line of least resistance1 and that1 if the conditions remain constant1 resistance in any direction is diminished by motion occurring in that direction1 supplies an explanation4 ,without further details it will be manifest that a like interpretation may be given to the succession of all other nervous changes4 ,if in the surrounding world there are objects1 attributes1 or actions1 that usually occur together1 the effects severally produced by them in the organism will become so connected by those repetitions which we call experience1 that they also will occur together4 ,in proportion to the frequency with which any external connexion of phenomena is experienced1 will be the strength of the answering internal connexion of nervous states4 ,thus there will arise all degrees of cohesion among nervous states1 as there are all degrees of commonness among the surrounding co-existences and sequences that generate them3 whence must result a general correspondence between associated ideas and associated actions in the environment4#ac ,the relation between emotions and actions may be similarly construed4 ,as a first illustration let us observe what happens with emotions that are undirected by volitions4 ,these1 like feelings in general1 expend themselves in generating organic changes1 and chiefly in muscular contractions4 ,as was pointed out in the last chapter1 there result movements of the involuntary and voluntary muscles1 that are great in proportion as the emotions are strong4 ,it remains here to be pointed out1 however1 that the order in which these muscles are affected is explicable only on the principle above set forth4 ,thus1 a pleasurable or painful state of mind of but slight intensity1 does little more than increase the pulsations of the heart4 ,why8 ,for the reason that the relation between nervous excitement and vascular contraction1 being common to every genus and species of feeling1 is the one of most frequent repetition2 that hence the nervous connexion is1 in the way above shown1 the one which offers the least resistance to a discharge2 and is therefore the one along which a feeble force produces motion4 ,a sentiment or passion that is somewhat stronger1 affects not only the heart but the muscles of the face1 and especially those around the mouth4 ,here the like explanation applies2 since these muscles1 being both comparatively small1 and1 for purposes of speech1 perpetually used1 offer less resistance than other voluntary muscles to the nerve-motor force4 ,by a further increase of emotion the respiratory and vocal muscles become perceptibly excited4 ,finally1 under strong passion1 the muscles in general of the trunk and limbs are violently contracted4 ,without saying that the facts can be thus interpreted in all their details 7a task requiring data impossible to obtain7 it may be safely said that the order of excitation is from muscles that are small and frequently acted on1 to those which are larger and less frequently acted on4 ,the single instance of laughter1 which is an undirected discharge of feeling that affects first the muscles round the mouth1 then those of the vocal and respiratory apparatus1 then those of the limbs1 and then those of the spine2#ad suffices to show that when no special route is opened for it1 a force evolved in the nervous centres produces motion along channels which offer the least resistance1 and if it is too great to escape by these1 produces motion along channels offering successively greater resistance4 ,probably it will be thought impossible to extend this reasoning so as to include volitions4 ,yet we are not without evidence that the transition from special desires to special muscular acts1 conforms to the same principle4 ,it may be shown that the mental antecedents of a voluntary movement1 are antecedents which temporarily make the line along which this movement takes place1 the line of least resistance4 ,for a volition1 suggested as it necessarily is by some previous thought connected with it by associations that determine the transition1 is itself a representation of the movements that are willed1 and of their sequences4 ,but to represent in consciousness certain of our own movements1 is partially to arouse the sensations accompanying such movements1 inclusive of those of muscular tension--is partially to excite the appropriate motor-nerves and all the other nerves implicated4 ,that is to say1 the volition is itself an incipient discharge along a line which previous experiences have rendered a line of least resistance4 ,and the passing of volition into action is simply a completion of the discharge4 ,one corollary from this must be noted before proceeding2 namely1 that the particular set of muscular movements by which any object of desire is reached1 are movements implying the smallest total of forces to be overcome4 ,as each feeling generates motion along the line of least resistance1 it is tolerably clear that a group of feelings1 constituting a more or less complex desire1 will generate motion along a series of lines of least resistance4 ,that is to say1 the desired end will be achieved with the smallest expenditure of effort4 ,should it be objected that through want of knowledge or want of skill1 a man often pursues the more laborious of two courses1 and so overcomes a larger total of opposing forces than was necessary2 the reply is1 that relatively to his mental state the course he takes is that which presents the fewest difficulties4 ,though there is another which in the abstract is easier1 yet his ignorance of it1 or inability to adopt it1 is1 physically considered1 the existence of an insuperable obstacle to the discharge of his energies in that direction4 ,experience obtained by himself1 or communicated by others1 has not established in him such channels of nervous communication as are required to make this better course the course of least resistance to him4 99 99 99 99 99 #ia4 ,as in individual animals1 inclusive of man1 motion follows lines of least resistance1 it is to be inferred that among aggregations of men1 the like will hold good4 ,the changes in a society1 being due to the joint actions of its members1 the courses of such changes will be determined as are those of all other changes wrought by composition of forces4 ,thus when we contemplate a society as an organism1 and observe the direction of its growth1 we find this direction to be that in which the average of opposing forces is the least4 ,its units have energies to be expended in self-maintenance and reproduction4 ,these energies are met by various environing energies that are antagonistic to them--those of geological origin1 those of climate1 of wild animals1 of other human races with whom they are at enmity or in competition4 ,and the tracts the society spreads over1 are those in which there is the smallest total antagonism4 ,or1 reducing the matter to its ultimate terms1 we may say that these social units have jointly and severally to preserve themselves and their offspring from those inorganic and organic forces which are ever tending to destroy them 7either indirectly by oxidation and by undue abstraction of heat1 or directly by bodily mutilation72 that these forces are either counteracted by others which are available in the shape of food1 clothing1 habitations1 and appliances of defence1 or are1 as far as may be1 eluded2 and that population spreads in whichever directions there is the readiest escape from these forces1 or the least exertion in obtaining the materials for resisting them1 or both4 ,for these reasons it happens that fertile valleys where water and vegetal produce abound1 are early peopled4 ,sea-shores1 too1 supplying a large amount of easily-gathered food1 are lines along which mankind have commonly spread4 ,the general fact that1 so far as we can judge from the traces left by them1 large societies first appeared in those tropical regions where the fruits of the earth are obtainable with comparatively little exertion1 and where the cost of maintaining bodily heat is but slight1 is a fact of like meaning4 ,and to these instances may be added the allied one daily furnished by emigration2 which we see going on towards countries presenting the fewest obstacles to the self-preservation of individuals1 and therefore to national growth4 ,similarly with that resistance to the movements of a society which neighbouring societies offer4 ,each of the tribes or nations inhabiting any region1 increases in numbers until it outgrows its means of subsistence4 ,in each there is thus a force ever pressing outwards on to adjacent areas--a force antagonized by like forces in the tribes or nations occupying those areas4 ,and the ever-recurring wars that result--the conquests of weaker tribes or nations1 and the over-running of their territories by the victors1 are instances of social movements taking place in the directions of least resistance4 ,nor do the conquered peoples1 when they escape extermination or enslavement1 fail to show us movements that are similarly determined4 ,for migrating as they do to less fertile regions--taking refuge in deserts or among mountains--moving in a direction where the resistance to social growth is comparatively great2 they still do this only under an excess of pressure in all other directions3 the physical obstacles to self-preservation they encounter1 being really less than the obstacles offered by the enemies from whom they fly4 ,internal social movements may also be thus interpreted4 ,localities naturally fitted for producing particular commodities--that is1 localities in which such commodities are got at the least cost of force--that is1 localities in which the desires for these commodities meet with the least resistance2 become localities especially devoted to the obtainment of these commodities4 ,where soil and climate render wheat a profitable crop1 or a crop from which the greatest amount of life-sustaining power is gained by a given quantity of effort1 the growth of wheat becomes the dominant industry4 ,where wheat cannot be economically produced1 oats1 or rye1 or maize1 or rice1 or potatoes1 is the agricultural staple4 ,along sea-shores men support themselves with least effort by catching fish2 and hence choose fishing as an occupation4 ,and in places that are rich in coal or metallic ores1 the population1 finding that labour devoted to the raising of these materials brings a larger return of food and clothing than when otherwise directed1 becomes a population of miners4 ,this last instance introduces us to the phenomena of exchange2 which equally illustrate the general law4 ,for the practice of barter begins as soon as it facilitates the fulfilment of men's desires1 by diminishing the exertion needed to reach the objects of those desires4 ,when instead of growing his own corn1 weaving his own cloth1 sewing his own shoes1 each man began to confine himself to farming1 or weaving1 or shoemaking2 it was because each found it more laborious to make everything he wanted1 than to make a great quantity of one thing and barter the surplus for the rest3 by exchange1 each procured the necessaries of life without encountering so much resistance4 ,moreover1 in deciding what commodity to produce1 each citizen was1 as he is at the present day1 guided in the same manner4 ,for besides those local conditions which determine whole sections of a society towards the industries easiest for them1 there are also individual conditions and individual aptitudes which to each citizen render certain occupations preferable2 and in choosing those forms of activity which their special circumstances and faculties dictate1 these social units are severally moving towards the objects of their desires in the directions which present to them the fewest obstacles4 ,the process of transfer which commerce pre-supposes1 supplies another series of examples4 ,so long as the forces to be overcome in procuring any necessary of life in the district where it is consumed1 are less than the forces to be overcome in procuring it from an adjacent district1 exchange does not take place4 ,but when the adjacent district produces it with an economy that is not out-balanced by cost of transit--when the distance is so small and the route so easy that the labour of conveyance plus the labour of production is less than the labour of production in the consuming district1 transfer commences4 ,movement in the direction of least resistance is also seen in the establishment of the channels along which intercourse takes place4 ,at the outset1 when goods are carried on the backs of men and horses1 the paths chosen are those which combine shortness with levelness and freedom from obstacles--those which are achieved with the smallest exertion4 ,and in the subsequent formation of each highway1 the course taken is that which deviates horizontally from a straight line so far only as is needful to avoid vertical deviations entailing greater labour in draught4 ,the smallest total of obstructive forces determines the route1 even in seemingly exceptional cases2 as where a detour is made to avoid the opposition of a landowner4 ,all subsequent improvements1 ending in macadamized roads1 canals1 and railways1 which reduce the antagonism of friction and gravity to a minimum1 exemplify the same truth4 ,after there comes to be a choice of roads between one point and another1 we still see that the road chosen is that along which the cost of transit is the least3 cost being the measure of resistance4 ,even where1 time being a consideration1 the more expensive route is followed1 it is so because the loss of time involves loss of force4 ,when1 division of labour having been carried to a considerable extent and means of communication made easy1 there arises a marked localization of industries1 the relative growths of the populations devoted to them may be interpreted on the same principle4 ,the influx of people to each industrial centre1 as well as the rate of multiplication of those already inhabiting it1 is determined by the payment for labour2 that is--by the quantity of commodities which a given amount of effort will obtain4 ,to say that artisans flock to places where1 in consequence of facilities for production1 an extra proportion of produce can be given in the shape of wages2 is to say that they flock to places where there are the smallest obstacles to the support of themselves and families4 ,hence1 the rapid increase of number which occurs in such places1 is really a social growth at points where the opposing forces are the least4 ,nor is the law less clearly to be traced in those functional changes daily going on4 ,the flow of capital into businesses yielding the largest returns2 the buying in the cheapest market and selling in the dearest2 the introduction of more economical modes of manufacture2 the development of better agencies for distribution2 and all those variations in the currents of trade that are noted in our newspapers and telegrams from hour to hour2 exhibit movement taking place in directions where it is met by the smallest total of opposing forces4 ,for if we analyze each of these changes--if instead of interest on capital we read surplus of products which remains after maintenance of labourers2 if we so interpret large interest or large surplus to imply labour expended with the greatest results2 and if labour expended with the greatest results means muscular action so directed as to evade obstacles as far as possible2 we see that all these commercial phenomena are complicated motions set up along lines of least resistance4 ,objections of two opposite kinds will perhaps be made to these sociological applications of the law4 ,by some it may be said that the term force as here used1 is used metaphorically--that to speak of men as impelled in certain directions by certain desires1 is a figure of speech and not the statement of a physical fact4 ,the reply is1 that the foregoing illustrations are to be interpreted literally1 and that the processes described are physical ones4 ,the pressure of hunger is an actual force--a sensation implying some state of nervous tension2 and the muscular action which the sensation prompts is really a discharge of it in the shape of bodily motion--a discharge which1 on analyzing the mental acts involved1 will be found to follow lines of least resistance4 ,hence the motions of a society whose members are impelled by this or any other desire1 are actually1 and not metaphorically1 to be understood in the manner shown4 ,an opposite objection may possibly be1 that the several illustrations given are elaborated truisms2 and that the law of direction of motion being once recognized1 the fact that social movements1 in common with all others1 must conform to it1 follows inevitably4 ,to this it may be rejoined1 that a mere abstract assertion that social movements must do this1 would carry no conviction to the majority2 and that it is needful to show how they do it4 ,for social evolution to be interpreted after the method proposed1 it is requisite that such generalisations as those of political economy shall be reduced to equivalent propositions expressed in terms of force and motion4 ,social movements of these various orders severally conform to the two derivative principles named at the outset4 ,in the first place we may observe how1 once set up in given directions1 such movements1 like all others1 tend to continue in these directions4 ,a commercial mania or panic1 a current of commodities1 a social custom1 a political agitation1 or a popular delusion1 maintains its course for a long time after its original source has ceased2 and requires antagonistic forces to arrest it4 ,in the second place it is to be noted that in proportion to the complexity of social forces is the tortuousness of social movements4 ,the involved series of muscular contractions gone through by the artizan1 that he may get the wherewithal to buy a loaf lying at the baker's next door1 show us how extreme becomes the indirectness of motion when the agencies at work become very numerous--a truth still better illustrated by the more public social actions2 as those which end in bringing a successful man of business1 towards the close of his life1 into parliament4 99 99 99 99 99 #ib4 ,and now of the general truth set forth in this chapter1 as of that dealt with in the last1 let us ask--what is our ultimate evidence8 ,must we accept it simply as an empirical generalization8 or is it to be established as a corollary from a still deeper truth8 ,the reader will anticipate the answer4 ,we shall find it deducible from that datum of consciousness which underlies all science4 ,suppose several tractive forces1 variously directed1 to be acting on a given body4 ,by what is known among mathematicians as the composition of forces1 there may be found for any two of these1 a single force of such amount and direction as to produce on the body an exactly equal effect4 ,if in the direction of each of them there be drawn a straight line1 and if the lengths of these two straight lines be made proportionate to the amounts of the forces2 and if from the end of each line there be drawn a line parallel to the other1 so as to complete a parallelogram2 then the diagonal of this parallelogram represents the amount and direction of a force that is equivalent to the two4 ,such a resultant force1 as it is called1 may be found for any pair of forces throughout the group4 ,similarly1 for any pair of such resultants a single resultant may be found4 ,and by repeating this course1 all of them may be reduced to two4 ,if these two are equal and opposite--that is1 if there is no line of greatest traction1 motion does not take place4 ,if they are opposite but not equal1 motion takes place in the direction of the greater4 ,and if they are neither equal nor opposite1 motion takes place in the direction of their resultant4 ,for in either of these cases there is an unantagonized force in one direction4 ,and this residuary force that is not neutralized by an opposing one1 must move the body in the direction in which it is acting4 ,to assert the contrary is to assert that a force can be expended without effect--without generating an equivalent force2 and by so implying that force can cease to exist1 this involves a denial of the persistence of force4 ,it needs scarcely be added that if in place of tractions we take resistances1 the argument equally holds2 and that it holds also where both tractions and resistances are concerned4 ,thus the law that motion follows the line of greatest traction1 or the line of least resistance1 or the resultant of the two1 is a necessary deduction from that primordial truth which transcends proof4 ,reduce the proposition to its simplest form1 and it becomes still more obviously consequent on the persistence of force4 ,suppose two weights suspended over a pulley or from the ends of an equal-armed lever2 or better still--suppose two men pulling against each other4 ,in such cases we say that the heavier weight will descend1 and that the stronger man will draw the weaker towards him4 ,but now1 if we are asked how we know which is the heavier weight or the stronger man2 we can only reply that it is the one producing motion in the direction of its pull4 ,our only evidence of excess of force is the movement it produces4 ,but if of two opposing tractions we can know one as greater than the other only by the motion it generates in its own direction1 then the assertion that motion occurs in the direction of greatest traction is a truism4 ,when1 going a step further back1 we seek a warrant for the assumption that of the two conflicting forces1 that is the greater which produces motion in its own direction1 we find no other than the consciousness that such part of the greater force as is unneutralized by the lesser1 must produce its effect--the consciousness that this residuary force cannot disappear1 but must manifest itself in some equivalent change--the consciousness that force is persistent4 ,here too1 as before1 it may be remarked that no amount of varied illustrations1 like those of which this chapter mainly consists1 can give greater certainty to the conclusion thus immediately drawn from the ultimate datum of consciousness4 ,for in all cases1 as in the simple ones just given1 we can identify the greatest force only by the resulting motion4 ,it is impossible for us ever to get evidence of the occurrence of motion in any other direction than that of the greatest force2 since our measure of relative greatness among forces is their relative power of generating motion4 ,and clearly1 while the comparative greatness of forces is thus determined1 no multiplication of instances can add certainty to a law of direction of movement which follows immediately from the persistence of force4 ,from this same primordial truth1 too1 may be deduced the principle that motion once set up along any line1 becomes itself a cause of subsequent motion along that line4 ,the mechanical axiom that1 if left to itself1 matter moving in any direction will continue in that direction with undiminished velocity1 is but an indirect assertion of the persistence of force2 since it is an assertion that the force manifested in the transfer of a body along a certain length of a certain line in a certain time1 cannot disappear without producing some equal manifestation--a manifestation which1 in the absence of conflicting forces1 must be a further transfer in the same direction at the same velocity4 ,in the case of matter traversing matter the like inference is necessitated4 ,here indeed the actions are much more complicated4 ,a liquid that follows a certain channel through or over a solid1 as water along the ,earth's surface1 loses part of its motion in the shape of heat1 through friction and collision with the matters forming its bed4 ,a further amount of its motion may be absorbed in overcoming forces which it liberates2 as when it loosens a mass which falls into1 and blocks up1 its channel4 ,but after these deductions by transformation into other modes of force1 any further deduction from the motion of the water is at the expense of a reaction on the channel1 which by so much diminishes its obstructive power3 such reaction being shown in the motion acquired by the detached portions which are carried away4 ,the cutting out of river-courses is a perpetual illustration of this truth4 ,still more involved is the case of motion passing through matter by impulse from part to part2 as a nervous discharge through animal tissue4 ,some chemical change may be wrought along the route traversed1 which may render it less fit than before for conveying a current4 ,or the motion may itself be in part metamorphosed into some obstructive form of force2 as in metals1 the conducting power of which is1 for the time1 decreased by the heat which the passage of electricity itself generates4 ,the real question is1 however1 what structural modification1 if any1 is produced throughout the matter traversed1 apart from incidental disturbing forces--apart from everything but the necessary resistance of the matter3 that1 namely1 which results from the inertia of its units4 ,if we confine our attention to that part of the motion which1 escaping transformation1 continues its course1 then it is a corollary from the persistence of force that as much of this remaining motion as is taken up in changing the positions of the units1 must leave these by so much less able to obstruct subsequent motion in the same direction4 ,thus in all the changes heretofore and at present displayed by the ,solar ,system2 in all those that have gone on and are still going on in the ,earth's crust2 in all processes of organic development and function2 in all mental actions and the effects they work on the body2 and in all modifications of structure and activity in societies2 the implied movements are of necessity determined in the manner above set forth4 ,every alteration in the arrangement of parts1 constituting ,evolution under each of its phases1 must conform to this universal principle4 ,wherever we see motion1 its direction must be that of the greatest force4 ,and wherever we see the greatest force to be acting in a given direction1 in that direction motion must ensue4 ----- ,footnote #ac3 ,this paragraph is a re-statement1 somewhat amplified1 of an idea set forth in the ,medico-,chirurgical ,review for ,january1 #ahei 7pp4 #ahi and #aij72 and contains the germ of the intended fifth part of the ,principles of ,psychology1 which was withheld for the reasons given in the preface to that work4 ,footnote #ad3 ,for details see a paper on 8,the ,physiology of ,laughter10 published in ,macmillan's ,magazine for ,march #ahfj4 ,,chapter ,,xi4 ,,the ,,rhythm ,,of ,,motion4 #ic4 ,when the pennant of a vessel lying becalmed first shows the coming breeze1 it does so by gentle undulations that travel from its fixed to its free end4 ,presently the sails begin to flap2 and their blows against the mast increase in rapidity as the breeze rises4 ,even when1 being fully bellied out1 they are in great part steadied by the strain of the yards and cordage1 their free edges tremble with each stronger gust4 ,and should there come a gale1 the jar that is felt on laying hold of the shrouds shows that the rigging vibrates2 while the rush and whistle of the wind prove that in it1 also1 rapid undulations are generated4 ,ashore the conflict between the current of air and the things it meets results in a like rhythmical action4 ,the leaves all shiver in the blast2 each branch oscillates2 and every exposed tree sways to and fro4 ,the blades of grass and dried bents in the meadows1 and still better the stalks in the neighbouring corn-fields1 exhibit the same rising and falling movement4 ,nor do the more stable objects fail to do the like1 though in a less manifest fashion2 as witness the shudder that may be felt throughout a house during the paroxysms of a violent storm4 ,streams of water produce in opposing objects the same general effects as do streams of air4 ,submerged weeds growing in the middle of a brook1 undulate from end to end4 ,branches brought down by the last flood1 and left entangled at the bottom where the current is rapid1 are thrown into a state of up and down movement that is slow or quick in proportion as they are large or small2 and where1 as in great rivers like the ,mississippi1 whole trees are thus held1 the name 8sawyers10 by which they are locally known1 sufficiently describes the rhythm produced in them4 ,note again the effect of the antagonism between the current and its channel4 ,in shallow places1 where the action of the bottom on the water flowing over it is visible1 we see a ripple produced--a series of undulations4 ,and if we study the action and re-action going on between the moving fluid and its banks1 we still find the principle illustrated1 though in a different way4 ,for in every rivulet1 as in the mapped-out course of every great river1 the bends of the stream from side to side throughout its tortuous course constitute a lateral undulation--an undulation so inevitable that even an artificially straightened channel is eventually changed into a serpentine one4 ,analogous phenomena may be observed where the water is stationary and the solid matter moving4 ,a stick drawn laterally through the water with much force1 proves by the throb which it communicates to the hand that it is in a state of vibration4 ,even where the moving body is massive1 it only requires that great force should be applied to get a sensible effect of like kind3 instance the screw of a screw-steamer1 which instead of a smooth rotation falls into a rapid rhythm that sends a tremor through the whole vessel4 ,the sound which results when a bow is drawn over a violin-string1 shows us vibrations produced by the movement of a solid over a solid4 ,in lathes and planing machines1 the attempt to take off a thick shaving causes a violent jar of the whole apparatus1 and the production of a series of waves on the iron or wood that is cut4 ,every boy in scraping his slate-pencil finds it scarcely possible to help making a ridged surface4 ,if you roll a ball along the ground or over the ice1 there is always more or less up and down movement--a movement that is visible while the velocity is considerable1 but becomes too small and rapid to be seen by the unaided eye as the velocity diminishes4 ,however smooth the rails1 and however perfectly built the carriages1 a railway-train inevitably gets into oscillations1 both lateral and vertical4 ,even where moving matter is suddenly arrested by collision1 the law is still illustrated2 for both the body striking and the body struck are made to tremble2 and trembling is rhythmical movement4 ,little as we habitually observe it1 it is yet certain that the impulses our actions impress from moment to moment on surrounding objects1 are propagated through them in vibrations4 ,it needs but to look through a telescope of high power1 to be convinced that each pulsation of the heart gives a jar to the whole room4 ,if we pass to motions of another order--those namely which take place in the etherial medium--we still find the same thing4 ,every fresh discovery confirms the hypothesis that light consists of undulations4 ,the rays of heat1 too1 are now found to have a like fundamental nature2 their undulations differing from those of light only in their comparative length4 ,nor do the movements of electricity fail to furnish us with an illustration2 though one of a different order4 ,the northern aurora may often be observed to pulsate with waves of greater brightness2 and the electric discharge through a vacuum shows us by its stratified appearance that the current is not uniform1 but comes in gushes of greater and lesser intensity4 ,should it be said that at any rate there are some motions1 as those of projectiles1 which are not rhythmical1 the reply is1 that the exception is apparent only2 and that these motions would be rhythmical if they were not interrupted4 ,it is common to assert that the trajectory of a cannon ball is a parabola2 and it is true that 7omitting atmospheric resistance7 the curve described differs so slightly from a parabola that it may practically be regarded as one4 ,but1 strictly speaking1 it is a portion of an extremely eccentric ellipse1 having the ,earth's centre of gravity for its remoter focus2 and but for its arrest by the substance of the ,earth1 the cannon ball would travel round that focus and return to the point whence it started2 again to repeat this slow rhythm4 ,indeed1 while seeming at first sight to do the reverse1 the discharge of a cannon furnishes one of the best illustrations of the principle enunciated4 ,the explosion produces violent undulations in the surrounding air4 ,the whizz of the shot1 as it flies towards its mark1 is due to another series of atmospheric undulations4 ,and the movement to and from the ,earth's centre1 which the cannon ball is beginning to perform1 being checked by solid matter1 is transformed into a rhythm of another order2 namely1 the vibration which the blow sends through neighbouring bodies4#ae ,rhythm is very generally not simple but compound4 ,there are usually at work various forces1 causing undulations differing in rapidity2 and hence it continually happens that besides the primary rhythms there are secondary rhythms1 produced by the periodic coincidence and antagonism of the primary ones4 ,double1 triple1 and even quadruple rhythms1 are thus generated4 ,one of the simplest instances is afforded by what in acoustics are known as 8beats30 recurring intervals of sound and silence which are perceived when two notes of nearly the same pitch are struck together2 and which are due to the alternate correspondence and antagonism of the atmospheric waves4 ,in like manner the various phenomena due to what is called interference of light1 severally result from the periodic agreement and disagreement of etherial undulations--undulations which1 by alternately intensifying and neutralizing each other1 produce intervals of increased and diminished light4 ,on the sea-shore may be noted sundry instances of compound rhythm4 ,we have that of the tides1 in which the daily rise and fall undergoes a fortnightly increase and decrease1 due to the alternate coincidence and antagonism of the solar and lunar attractions4 ,we have again that which is perpetually furnished by the surface of the sea3 every large wave bearing smaller ones on its sides1 and these still smaller ones2 with the result that each flake of foam1 along with the portion of water bearing it1 undergoes minor ascents and descents of several orders while it is being raised and lowered by the greater billows4 ,a quite different and very interesting example of compound rhythm1 occurs in the little rills which1 at low tide1 run over the sand out of the shingle banks above4 ,where the channel of one of these is narrow1 and the stream runs strongly1 the sand at the bottom is raised into a series of ridges corresponding to the ripple of the water4 ,on watching for a short time1 it will be seen that these ridges are being raised higher and the ripple growing stronger2 until at length1 the action becoming violent1 the whole series of ridges is suddenly swept away1 the stream runs smoothly1 and the process commences afresh4 ,instances of still more complex rhythms might be added2 but they will come more appropriately in connexion with the several forms of ,evolution1 hereafter to be dealt with4 ,from the ensemble of the facts as above set forth1 it will be seen that rhythm results wherever there is a conflict of forces not in equilibrium4 ,if the antagonist forces at any point are balanced1 there is rest2 and in the absence of motion there can of course be no rhythm4 ,but if instead of a balance there is an excess of force in one direction--if1 as necessarily follows1 motion is set up in that direction2 then for that motion to continue uniformly in that direction1 it is requisite that the moving matter should1 notwithstanding its unceasing change of place1 present unchanging relations to the sources of force by which its motion is produced and opposed4 ,this however is impossible4 ,every further transfer through space must alter the ratio between the forces concerned--must increase or decrease the predominance of one force over the other--must prevent uniformity of movement4 ,and if the movement cannot be uniform1 then1 in the absence of acceleration or retardation continued through infinite time and space1 7results which cannot be conceived7 the only alternative is rhythm4 ,a secondary conclusion must not be omitted4 ,in the last chapter we saw that motion is never absolutely rectilinear2 and here it remains to be added that1 as a consequence1 rhythm is necessarily incomplete4 ,a truly rectilinear rhythm can arise only when the opposing forces are in exactly the same line2 and the probabilities against this are infinitely great4 ,to generate a perfectly circular rhythm1 the two forces concerned must be exactly at right angles to each other1 and must have exactly a certain ratio2 and against this the probabilities are likewise infinitely great4 ,all other proportions and directions of the two forces will produce an ellipse of greater or less eccentricity4 ,and when1 as indeed always happens1 above two forces are engaged1 the curve described must be more complex2 and cannot exactly repeat itself4 ,so that in fact throughout nature1 this action and re-action of forces never brings about a complete return to a previous state4 ,where the movement is very involved1 and especially where it is that of some aggregate whose units are partially independent1 anything like a regular curve is no longer traceable2 we see nothing more than a general oscillation4 ,and on the completion of any periodic movement1 the degree in which the state arrived at differs from the state departed from1 is usually marked in proportion as the influences at work are numerous4 99 99 99 99 99 #id4 ,that spiral arrangement so general among the more diffused nebul--an arrangement which must be assumed by matter moving towards a centre of gravity through a resisting medium--shows us the progressive establishment of revolution1 and therefore of rhythm2 in those remote spaces which the nebul occupy4 ,double stars1 moving round common centres of gravity in periods some of which are now ascertained1 exhibit settled rhythmical actions in distant parts of our sidereal system4 ,and another fact which1 though of a different order1 has a like general significance1 is furnished by variable stars--stars which alternately brighten and fade4 ,the periodicities of the planets1 satellites1 and comets1 are so familiar that it would be inexcusable to name them1 were it not needful here to point out that they are so many grand illustrations of this general law of movement4 ,but besides the revolutions of these bodies in their orbits 7all more or less excentric7 and their rotations on their axes1 the ,solar ,system presents us with various rhythms of a less manifest and more complex kind4 ,in each planet and satellite there is the revolution of the nodes--a slow change in the position of the orbit-plane1 which after completing itself commences afresh4 ,there is the gradual alteration in the length of the axis major of the orbit2 and also of its excentricity3 both of which are rhythmical alike in the sense that they alternate between maxima and minima1 and in the sense that the progress from one extreme to the other is not uniform1 but is made with fluctuating velocity4 ,then1 too1 there is the revolution of the line of apsides1 which in course of time moves round the heavens--not regularly1 but through complex oscillations4 ,and further we have variations in the directions of the planetary axes--that known as nutation1 and that larger gyration which1 in the case of the ,earth1 causes the precession of the equinoxes4 ,these rhythms1 already more or less compound1 are compounded with each other4 ,such an instance as the secular acceleration and retardation of the moon1 consequent on the varying excentricity of the ,earth's orbit1 is one of the simplest4 ,another1 having more important consequences1 results from the changing direction of the axes of rotation in planets whose orbits are decidedly excentric4 ,every planet1 during a certain long period1 presents more of its northern than of its southern hemisphere to the sun at the time of its nearest approach to him2 and then again1 during a like period1 presents more of its southern hemisphere than of its northern--a recurring coincidence which1 though causing in some planets no sensible alterations of climate1 involves in the case of the ,earth an epoch of #ba1jjj years1 during which each hemisphere goes through a cycle of temperate seasons1 and seasons that are extreme in their heat and cold4 ,nor is this all4 ,there is even a variation of this variation4 ,for the summers and winters of the whole ,earth become more or less strongly contrasted1 as the excentricity of its orbit increases and decreases4 ,hence during increase of the excentricity1 the epochs of moderately contrasted seasons and epochs of strongly contrasted seasons1 through which alternately each hemisphere passes1 must grow more and more different in the degrees of their contrasts2 and contrariwise during decrease of the excentricity4 ,so that in the quantity of light and heat which any portion of the ,earth receives from the sun1 there goes on a quadruple rhythm3 that of day and night2 that of summer and winter2 that due to the changing position of the axis at perihelion and aphelion1 taking #ba1jjj years to complete2 and that involved by the variation of the orbit's excentricity1 gone through in millions of years4 99 99 99 99 99 #ie4 ,those terrestrial processes whose dependence on the solar heat is direct1 of course exhibit a rhythm that corresponds to the periodically changing amount of heat which each part of the ,earth receives4 ,the simplest1 though the least obtrusive1 instance is supplied by the magnetic variations4 ,in these there is a diurnal increase and decrease1 an annual increase and decrease1 and a decennial increase and decrease2 the latter answering to a period during which the solar spots become alternately abundant and scarce3 besides which known variations there are probably others corresponding with the astronomical cycles just described4 ,more obvious examples are furnished by the movements of the ocean and the atmosphere4 ,marine currents from the equator to the poles above1 and from the poles to the equator beneath1 show us an unceasing backward and forward motion throughout this vast mass of water--a motion varying in amount according to the seasons1 and compounded with smaller like motions of local origin4 ,the similarly-caused general currents in the air1 have similar annual variations similarly modified4 ,irregular as they are in detail1 we still see in the monsoons and other tropical atmospheric disturbances1 or even in our own equinoctial gales and spring east winds1 a periodicity sufficiently decided4 ,again1 we have an alternation of times during which evaporation predominates with times during which condensation predominates3 shown in the tropics by strongly marked rainy seasons and seasons of drought1 and in the temperate zones by corresponding changes of which the periodicity1 though less definite1 is still traceable4 ,the diffusion and precipitation of water1 besides the slow alternations answering to different parts of the year1 furnish us with examples of rhythm of a more rapid kind4 ,during wet weather1 lasting1 let us say1 over some weeks1 the tendency to condense1 though greater than the tendency to evaporate1 does not show itself in continuous rain2 but the period is made up of rainy days and days that are wholly or partially fair4 ,nor is it in this rude alternation only that the law is manifested4 ,during any day throughout this wet weather a minor rhythm is traceable2 and especially so when the tendencies to evaporate and to condense are nearly balanced4 ,among mountains this minor rhythm and its causes may be studied to great advantage4 ,moist winds1 which do not precipitate their contained water in passing over the comparatively warm lowlands1 lose so much heat when they reach the cold mountain peaks1 that condensation rapidly takes place4 ,water1 however1 in passing from the gaseous to the fluid state1 gives out a considerable amount of heat2 and hence the resulting clouds are warmer than the air that precipitates them1 and much warmer than the high rocky surfaces round which they fold themselves4 ,hence in the course of the storm1 these high rocky surfaces are raised in temperature1 partly by radiation from the enwrapping cloud1 partly by contact of the falling rain-drops4 ,giving off more heat than before1 they no longer lower so greatly the temperature of the air passing over them2 and so cease to precipitate its contained water4 ,the clouds break2 the sky begins to clear2 and a gleam of sunshine promises that the day is going to be fine4 ,but the small supply of heat which the cold mountain's sides have received1 is soon lost3 especially when the dispersion of the clouds permits free radiation into space4 ,very soon1 therefore1 these elevated surfaces1 becoming as cold as at first1 7or perhaps even colder in virtue of the evaporation set up17 begin again to condense the vapour in the air above2 and there comes another storm1 followed by the same effects as before4 ,in lowland regions this action and reaction is usually less conspicuous1 because the contrast of temperatures is less marked4 ,even here1 however1 it may be traced2 and that not only on showery days1 but on days of continuous rain2 for in these we do not see uniformity3 always there are fits of harder and gentler rain that are probably caused as above explained4 ,of course these meteorologic rhythms involve something corresponding to them in the changes wrought by wind and water on the ,earth's surface4 ,variations in the quantities of sediment brought down by rivers that rise and fall with the seasons1 must cause variations in the resulting strata--alternations of colour or quality in the successive lamin4 ,beds formed from the detritus of shores worn down and carried away by the waves1 must similarly show periodic differences answering to the periodic winds of the locality4 ,in so far as frost influences the rate of denudation1 its recurrence is a factor in the rhythm of sedimentary deposits4 ,and the geological changes produced by glaciers and icebergs must similarly have their alternating periods of greater and less intensity4 ,there is evidence also that modifications in the ,earth's crust due to igneous action have a certain periodicity4 ,volcanic eruptions are not continuous but intermittent1 and as far as the data enable us to judge1 have a certain average rate of recurrence2 which rate of recurrence is complicated by rising into epochs of greater activity and falling into epochs of comparative quiescence4 ,so too is it with earthquakes and the elevations or depressions caused by them4 ,at the mouth of the ,mississippi1 the alternation of strata gives decisive proof of successive sinkings of the surface1 that have taken place at tolerably equal intervals4 ,everywhere1 in the extensive groups of conformable strata that imply small subsidences recurring with a certain average frequency1 we see a rhythm in the action and reaction between the ,earth's crust and its molten contents--a rhythm compounded with those slower ones shown in the termination of groups of strata1 and the commencement of other groups not conformable to them4 ,there is even reason for suspecting a geological periodicity that is immensely slower and far wider in its effects2 namely1 an alternation of those vast upheavals and submergencies by which continents are produced where there were oceans1 and oceans where there were continents4 ,for supposing1 as we may fairly do1 that the ,earth's crust is throughout of tolerably equal thickness1 it is manifest that such portions of it as become most depressed below the average level1 must have their inner surfaces most exposed to the currents of molten matter circulating within1 and will therefore undergo a larger amount of what may be called igneous denudation2 while1 conversely1 the withdrawal of the inner surfaces from these currents where the ,earth's crust is most elevated1 will cause a thickening more or less compensating the aqueous denudation going on externally4 ,hence those depressed areas over which the deepest oceans lie1 being gradually thinned beneath and not covered by much sedimentary deposit above1 will become areas of least resistance1 and will then begin to yield to the upward pressure of the ,earth's contents2 whence will result1 throughout such areas1 long-continued elevations1 ceasing only when the reverse state of things has been brought about4 ,whether this speculation be well or ill founded1 does not however affect the general conclusion4 ,apart from it we have sufficient evidence that geologic processes are rhythmical4 99 99 99 99 99 #if4 ,perhaps nowhere are the illustrations of rhythm so numerous and so manifest as among the phenomena of life4 ,plants do not1 indeed1 usually show us any decided periodicities1 save those determined by day and night and by the seasons4 ,but in animals we have a great variety of movements in which the alternation of opposite extremes goes on with all degrees of rapidity4 ,the swallowing of food is effected by a wave of constriction passing along the sophagus2 its digestion is accompanied by a muscular action of the stomach that is also undulatory2 and the peristaltic motion of the intestines is of like nature4 ,the blood obtained from this food is propelled not in a uniform current but in pulses2 and it is aerated by lungs that alternately contract and expand4 ,all locomotion results from oscillating movements3 even where it is apparently continuous1 as in many minute forms1 the microscope proves the vibration of cilia to be the agency by which the creature is moved smoothly forwards4 ,primary rhythms of the organic actions are compounded with secondary ones of longer duration4 ,these various modes of activity have their recurring periods of increase and decrease4 ,we see this in the periodic need for food1 and in the periodic need for repose4 ,each meal induces a more rapid rhythmic action of the digestive organs2 the pulsation of the heart is accelerated2 and the inspirations become more frequent4 ,during sleep1 on the contrary1 these several movements slacken4 ,so that in the course of the twenty-four hours1 those small undulations of which the different kinds of organic action are constituted1 undergo one long wave of increase and decrease1 complicated with several minor waves4 ,experiments have shown that there are still slower rises and falls of functional activity4 ,waste and assimilation are not balanced by every meal1 but one or other maintains for some time a slight excess2 so that a person in ordinary health is found to undergo an increase and decrease of weight during recurring intervals of tolerable equality4 ,besides these regular periods there are still longer and comparatively irregular ones2 namely1 those alternations of greater and less vigour1 which even healthy people experience4 ,so inevitable are these oscillations that even men in training cannot be kept stationary at their highest power1 but when they have reached it begin to retrograde4 ,further evidence of rhythm in the vital movements is furnished by invalids4 ,sundry disorders are named from the intermittent character of their symptoms4 ,even where the periodicity is not very marked1 it is mostly traceable4 ,patients rarely if ever get uniformly worse2 and convalescents have usually their days of partial relapse or of less decided advance4 ,aggregates of living creatures illustrate the general truth in other ways4 ,if each species of organism be regarded as a whole1 it displays two kinds of rhythm4 ,life as it exists in all the members of such species1 is an extremely complex kind of movement1 more or less distinct from the kinds of movement which constitutes life in other species4 ,in each individual of the species1 this extremely complex kind of movement begins1 rises to its climax1 declines1 and ceases in death4 ,and every successive generation thus exhibits a wave of that peculiar activity characterizing the species as a whole4 ,the other form of rhythm is to be traced in that variation of number which each tribe of animals and plants is ever undergoing4 ,throughout the unceasing conflict between the tendency of a species to increase and the antagonistic tendencies1 there is never an equilibrium3 one always predominates4 ,in the case even of a cultivated plant or domesticated animal1 where artificial means are used to maintain the supply at a uniform level1 we still see that oscillations of abundance and scarcity cannot be avoided4 ,and among the creatures uncared for by man1 such oscillations are usually more marked4 ,after a race of organisms has been greatly thinned by enemies or lack of food1 its surviving members become more favourably circumstanced than usual4 ,during the decline in their numbers their food has grown relatively more abundant2 while their enemies have diminished from want of prey4 ,the conditions thus remain for some time favourable to their increase2 and they multiply rapidly4 ,by and by their food is rendered relatively scarce1 at the same time that their enemies have become more numerous2 and the destroying influences being thus in excess1 their number begins to diminish again4 ,yet one more rhythm1 extremely slow in its action1 may be traced in the phenomena of ,life1 contemplated under their most general aspect4 ,the researches of palontologists show1 that there have been going on1 during the vast period of which our sedimentary rocks bear record1 successive changes of organic forms4 ,species have appeared1 become abundant1 and then disappeared4 ,genera1 at first constituted of but few species1 have for a time gone on growing more multiform2 and then have begun to decline in the number of their subdivisions2 leaving at last but one or two representatives1 or none at all4 ,during longer epochs whole orders have thus arisen1 culminated1 and dwindled away4 ,and even those wider divisions containing many orders have similarly undergone a gradual rise1 a high tide1 and a long-continued ebb4 ,the stalked ,crinoidea1 for example1 which1 during the carboniferous epoch1 became abundant1 have almost disappeared3 only a single species being extant4 ,once a large family of molluscs1 the ,brachiopoda have now become rare4 ,the shelled ,cephalopods1 at one time dominant among the inhabitants of the ocean1 both in number of forms and of individuals1 are in our day nearly extinct4 ,and after an 8age of reptiles10 there has come an age in which reptiles have been in great measure supplanted by mammals4 ,whether these vast rises and falls of different kinds of life ever undergo anything approaching to repetitions1 7which they may possibly do in correspondence with those vast cycles of elevation and subsidence that produce continents and oceans17 it is sufficiently clear that ,life on the ,earth has not progressed uniformly1 but in immense undulations4 99 99 99 99 99 #ig4 ,it is not manifest that the changes of consciousness are in any sense rhythmical4 ,yet here1 too1 analysis proves both that the mental state existing at any moment is not uniform1 but is decomposable into rapid oscillations2 and also that mental states pass through longer intervals of increasing and decreasing intensity4 ,though while attending to any single sensation1 or any group of related sensations constituting the consciousness of an object1 we seem to remain for the time in a persistent and homogeneous condition of mind1 a careful self-examination shows that this apparently unbroken mental state is in truth traversed by a number of minor states1 in which various other sensations and perceptions are rapidly presented and disappear4 ,from the admitted fact that thinking consists in the establishment of relations1 it is a necessary corollary that the maintenance of consciousness in any one state to the entire exclusion of other states1 would be a cessation of thought1 that is1 of consciousness4 ,so that any seemingly continuous feeling1 say of pressure1 really consists of portions of that feeling perpetually recurring after the momentary intrusion of other feelings and ideas--quick thoughts concerning the place where it is felt1 the external object producing it1 its consequences1 and other things suggested by association4 ,thus there is going on an extremely rapid departure from1 and return to1 that particular mental state which we regard as persistent4 ,besides the evidence of rhythm in consciousness which direct analysis thus affords1 we may gather further evidence from the correlation between feeling and movement4 ,sensations and emotions expend themselves in producing muscular contractions4 ,if a sensation or emotion were strictly continuous1 there would be a continuous discharge along those motor nerves acted upon4 ,but so far as experiments with artificial stimuli enable us to judge1 a continuous discharge along the nerve leading to a muscle1 does not contract it3 a broken discharge is required--a rapid succession of shocks4 ,hence muscular contraction pre-supposes that rhythmic state of consciousness which direct observation discloses4 ,a much more conspicuous rhythm1 having longer waves1 is seen during the outflow of emotion into dancing1 poetry1 and music4 ,the current of mental energy that shows itself in these modes of bodily action1 is not continuous1 but falls into a succession of pulses4 ,the measure of a dance is produced by the alternation of strong muscular contractions with weaker ones2 and1 save in measures of the simplest order such as are found among barbarians and children1 this alternation is compounded with longer rises and falls in the degree of muscular excitement4 ,poetry is a form of speech which results when the emphasis is regularly recurrent2 that is1 when the muscular effort of pronunciation has definite periods of greater and less intensity--periods that are complicated with others of like nature answering to the successive verses4 ,music1 in still more various ways1 exemplifies the law4 ,there are the recurring bars1 in each of which there is a primary and a secondary beat4 ,there is the alternate increase and decrease of muscular strain1 implied by the ascents and descents to the higher and lower notes--ascents and descents composed of smaller waves1 breaking the rises and falls of the larger ones1 in a mode peculiar to each melody4 ,and then we have1 further1 the alternation of piano and forte passages4 ,that these several kinds of rhythm1 characterizing sthetic expression1 are not1 in the common sense of the word1 artificial1 but are intenser forms of an undulatory movement habitually generated by feeling in its bodily discharge1 is shown by the fact that they are all traceable in ordinary speech2 which in every sentence has its primary and secondary emphases1 and its cadence containing a chief rise and fall complicated with subordinate rises and falls2 and which is accompanied by a more or less oscillatory action of the limbs when the emotion is great4 ,still longer undulations may be observed by every one1 in himself and in others1 on occasions of extreme pleasure or extreme pain4 ,note1 in the first place1 that pain having its origin in bodily disorder1 is nearly always perceptibly rhythmical4 ,during hours in which it never actually ceases1 it has its variations of intensity--fits or paroxysms2 and then after these hours of suffering there usually come hours of comparative ease4 ,moral pain has the like smaller and larger waves4 ,one possessed by intense grief does not utter continuous moans1 or shed tears with an equable rapidity2 but these signs of passion come in recurring bursts4 ,then after a time during which such stronger and weaker waves of emotion alternate1 there comes a calm--a time of comparative deadness2 to which again succeeds another interval1 when dull sorrow rises afresh into acute anguish1 with its series of paroxysms4 ,similarly in great delight1 especially as manifested by children who have its display less under control1 there are visible variations in the intensity of feeling shown--fits of laughter and dancing about1 separated by pauses in which smiles1 and other slight manifestations of pleasure1 suffice to discharge the lessened excitement4 ,nor are there wanting evidences of mental undulations greater in length than any of these--undulations which take weeks1 or months1 or years1 to complete themselves4 ,we continually hear of moods which recur at intervals4 ,very many persons have their epochs of vivacity and depression4 ,there are periods of industry following periods of idleness2 and times at which particular subjects or tastes are cultivated with zeal1 alternating with times at which they are neglected4 ,respecting which slow oscillations1 the only qualification to be made is1 that being affected by numerous influences1 they are comparatively irregular4 99 99 99 99 99 #ih4 ,in nomadic societies the changes of place1 determined as they usually are by exhaustion or failure of the supply of food1 are periodic2 and in many cases show a recurrence answering to the seasons4 ,each tribe that has become in some degree fixed in its locality1 goes on increasing1 till under the pressures of unsatisfied desires1 there results migration of some part of it to a new region--a process repeated at intervals4 ,from such excesses of population1 and such successive waves of migration1 come conflicts with other tribes2 which are also increasing and tending to diffuse themselves4 ,this antagonism1 like all others1 results not in an uniform motion1 but in an intermittent one4 ,war1 exhaustion1 recoil--peace1 prosperity1 and renewed aggression3--see here the alternation more or less discernible in the military activities of both savage and civilized nations4 ,and irregular as is this rhythm1 it is not more so than the different sizes of the societies1 and the extremely involved causes of variation in their strengths1 would lead us to anticipate4 ,passing from external to internal changes1 we meet with this backward and forward movement under many forms4 ,in the currents of commerce it is especially conspicuous4 ,exchange during early times is almost wholly carried on at fairs1 held at long intervals in the chief centres of population4 ,the flux and reflux of people and commodities which each of these exhibits1 becomes more frequent as national development leads to greater social activity4 ,the more rapid rhythm of weekly markets begins to supersede the slow rhythm of fairs4 ,and eventually the process of exchange becomes at certain places so active1 as to bring about daily meetings of buyers and sellers--a daily wave of accumulation and distribution of cotton1 or corn1 or capital4 ,if from exchange we turn to production and consumption1 we see undulations1 much longer indeed in their periods1 but almost equally obvious4 ,supply and demand are never completely adapted to each other2 but each of them from time to time in excess1 leads presently to an excess of the other4 ,farmers who have one season produced wheat very abundantly1 are disgusted with the consequent low price2 and next season1 sowing a much smaller quantity1 bring to market a deficient crop2 whence follows a converse effect4 ,consumption undergoes parallel undulations that need not be specified4 ,the balancing of supplies between different districts1 too1 entails analogous oscillations4 ,a place at which some necessary of life is scarce1 becomes a place to which currents of it are set up from other places where it is relatively abundant2 and these currents from all sides lead to a wave of accumulation where they meet--a glut3 whence follows a recoil--a partial return of the currents4 ,but the undulatory character of these actions is perhaps best seen in the rises and falls of prices4 ,these1 given in numerical measures which may be tabulated and reduced to diagrams1 show us in the clearest manner how commercial movements are compounded of oscillations of various magnitudes4 ,the price of consols or the price of wheat1 as thus represented1 is seen to undergo vast ascents and descents whose highest and lowest points are reached only in the course of years4 ,these largest waves of variation are broken by others extending over periods of perhaps many months4 ,on these again come others having a week or two's duration4 ,and were the changes marked in greater detail1 we should have the smaller undulations that take place each day1 and the still smaller ones which brokers telegraph from hour to hour4 ,the whole outline would show a complication like that of a vast ocean-swell1 on whose surface there rise large billows1 which themselves bear waves of moderate size1 covered by wavelets1 that are roughened by a minute ripple4 ,similar diagrammatic representations of births1 marriages1 and deaths1 of disease1 of crime1 of pauperism1 exhibit involved conflicts of rhythmical motions throughout society under these several aspects4 ,there are like characteristics in social changes of a more complex kind4 ,both in ,england and among continental nations1 the action and reaction of political progress have come to be generally recognized4 ,religion1 besides its occasional revivals of smaller magnitude1 has its long periods of exaltation and depression--generations of belief and self-mortification1 following generations of indifference and laxity4 ,there are poetical epochs1 and epochs in which the sense of the beautiful seems almost dormant4 ,philosophy1 after having been awhile predominant1 lapses for a long season into neglect2 and then again slowly revives4 ,each science has its eras of deductive reasoning1 and its eras when attention is chiefly directed to collecting and colligating facts4 ,and how in such minor but more obtrusive phenomena as those of fashion1 there are ever going on oscillations from one extreme to the other1 is a trite observation4 ,as may be foreseen1 social rhythms well illustrate the irregularity that results from combination of many causes4 ,where the variations are those of one simple element in national life1 as the supply of a particular commodity1 we do indeed witness a return1 after many involved movements1 to a previous condition--the price may become what it was before3 implying a like relative abundance4 ,but where the action is one into which many factors enter1 there is never a recurrence of exactly the same state4 ,a political reaction never brings round just the old form of things4 ,the rationalism of the present day differs widely from the rationalism of the last century4 ,and though fashion from time to time revives extinct types of dress1 these always re-appear with decided modifications4 99 99 99 99 99 #ii4 ,the universality of this principle suggests a question like that raised in foregoing cases4 ,rhythm being manifested in all forms of movement1 we have reason to suspect that it is determined by some primordial condition to action in general4 ,the tacit implication is that it is deducible from the persistence of force4 ,this we shall find to be the fact4 ,when the prong of a tuning-fork is pulled on one side by the finger1 a certain extra tension is produced among its cohering particles2 which resist any force that draws them out of their state of equilibrium4 ,as much force as the finger exerts in pulling the prong aside1 so much opposing force is brought into play among the cohering particles4 ,hence1 when the prong is liberated1 it is urged back by a force equal to that used in deflecting it4 ,when1 therefore1 the prong reaches its original position1 the force impressed on it during its recoil1 has generated in it a corresponding amount of momentum--an amount of momentum nearly equivalent1 that is1 to the force originally impressed 7nearly1 we must say1 because a certain portion has gone in communicating motion to the air1 and a certain other portion has been transformed into heat74 ,this momentum carries the prong beyond the position of rest1 nearly as far as it was originally drawn in the reverse direction2 until at length1 being gradually used up in producing an opposing tension among the particles1 it is all lost4 ,the opposing tension into which the expended momentum has been transformed1 then generates a second recoil2 and so on continually--the vibration eventually ceasing only because at each movement a certain amount of force goes in creating atmospheric and etherial undulations4 ,now it needs but to contemplate this repeated action and reaction1 to see that it is1 like every action and reaction1 a consequence of the persistence of force4 ,the force exerted by the finger in bending the prong cannot disappear4 ,under what form then does it exist8 ,it exists under the form of that cohesive tension which it has generated among the particles4 ,this cohesive tension cannot cease without an equivalent result4 ,what is its equivalent result8 ,the momentum generated in the prong while being carried back to its position of rest4 ,this momentum too--what becomes of it8 ,it must either continue as momentum1 or produce some correlative force of equal amount4 ,it cannot continue as momentum1 since change of place is resisted by the cohesion of the parts2 and thus it gradually disappears by being transformed into tension among these parts4 ,this is re-transformed into the equivalent momentum2 and so on continuously4 ,if instead of motion that is directly antagonized by the cohesion of matter1 we consider motion through space1 the same truth presents itself under another form4 ,though here no opposing force seems at work1 and therefore no cause of rhythm is apparent1 yet its own accumulated momentum must eventually carry the moving body beyond the body attracting it2 and so must become a force at variance with that which generated it4 ,from this conflict1 rhythm necessarily results as in the foregoing case4 ,the force embodied as momentum in a given direction1 cannot be destroyed2 and if it eventually disappears1 it re-appears in the reaction on the retarding body2 which begins afresh to draw the now arrested mass back from its aphelion4 ,the only conditions under which there could be absence of rhythm--the only conditions1 that is1 under which there could be a continuous motion through space in the same straight line for ever1 would be the existence of an infinity void of everything but the moving body4 ,and neither of these conditions can be represented in thought4 ,infinity is inconceivable2 and so also is a motion which never had a commencement in some pre-existing source of power4 ,thus1 then1 rhythm is a necessary characteristic of all motion4 ,given the coexistence everywhere of antagonist forces--a postulate which1 as we have seen1 is necessitated by the form of our experience--and rhythm is an inevitable corollary from the persistence of force4 ,hence1 throughout that re-arrangement of parts which constitutes ,evolution1 we must nowhere expect to see the change from one position of things to another1 effected by continuous movement in the same direction4 ,be it in that kind of ,evolution which the inorganic creation presents1 or in that presented by the organic creation1 we shall everywhere find a periodicity of action and reaction--a backward and forward motion1 of which progress is a differential result4 ----- ,footnote #ae3 ,after having for some years supposed myself alone in the belief that all motion is rhythmical1 ,i discovered that my friend ,professor ,tyndall also held this doctrine4 ,,chapter ,,xii4 ,,the ,,conditions ,,essential ,,to ,,evolution4 #ajj4 ,one more preliminary is needful before proceeding4 ,we have still to study the conditions under which alone1 ,evolution can take place4 ,the process to be interpreted is1 as already said1 a certain change in the arrangement of parts4 ,that increase of heterogeneity commonly displayed throughout ,evolution1 is not an increase in the number of kinds of ultimate or undecomposable units which an aggregate contains2 but it is a change in the distribution of such units4 ,if it be assumed that what we call chemical elements1 are absolutely simple 7which is1 however1 an hypothesis having no better warrant than the opposite one72 then it must be admitted that in respect to the number of kinds of matter contained in it1 the ,earth is not more heterogeneous at present than it was at first--that in this respect1 it would be as heterogeneous were all its undecomposable parts uniformly mixed1 as it is now1 when they are arranged and combined in countless different ways4 ,but the increase of heterogeneity with which we have to deal1 and of which alone our senses can take cognizance1 is that produced by the passage from unity of distribution to variety of distribution4 ,given an aggregate consisting of several orders of primitive units that are unchangeable2 then1 these units may be so uniformly dispersed among each other1 that any portion of the mass shall be like any other portion in its sensible properties2 or they may be so segregated1 simply and in endless combinations1 that the various portions of the mass shall not be like each other in their sensible properties4 ,a transformation of one of these arrangements into the other1 is that which constitutes ,evolution4 ,we have to analyze the process through which structural uniformity becomes structural multiformity--to ascertain how the originally equal relations of position among the mixed units1 pass into relations of position that are more and more unequal1 and more and more numerous in their kinds of inequality2 and how this takes place throughout all the ascending grades of compound units1 until we come even to those of which societies are made up4 ,change in the relations of position among the component units1 simple or complex1 being the phenomenon we have to interpret2 we must first inquire what are the circumstances which prevent its occurrence1 and what are the circumstances which facilitate it4 99 99 99 99 99 #aja4 ,the constituents of an aggregate cannot be re-arranged1 unless they are moveable3 manifestly1 they must not be so firmly bound together that the incident force fails to alter their positions4 ,no bodies are1 indeed1 possessed of this absolute rigidity2 since an incident force in being propagated through a body1 always produces temporary alterations in the relative positions of its units1 if not permanent alterations4 ,it is true also1 that even permanent re-arrangements of the units may be thus wrought throughout the interiors of comparatively dense masses1 without any outward sign3 as happens with certain crystals1 which1 on exposure to sunlight1 undergo molecular changes so great as to alter their planes of cleavage4 ,nevertheless1 since total immobility of the parts must totally negative their re-arrangement2 and since that comparative immobility which we see in very coherent matter1 is a great obstacle to re-arrangement2 it is self-evident that ,evolution can be exhibited in any considerable degree1 only where there is comparative mobility of parts4 ,on the other hand1 those definite distributive changes which constitute ,evolution1 cannot be extensively or variously displayed1 where the mobility of the parts is extreme4 ,in liquids1 the cohesion of the units is so slight that there is no permanency in their relations of position to each other4 ,such re-arrangement as any incident force generates1 is immediately destroyed again by the momentum of the constituents moved2 and so1 nothing but that temporary heterogeneity seen in circulating currents1 can be produced4 ,the like still more obviously holds of gases4 ,thus1 while the theoretical limits between which ,evolution is possible1 are absolute immobility of parts and absolute mobility of parts2 we may say that practically1 ,evolution cannot go on to any considerable extent where the mobility is very great or very little4 ,a few examples will facilitate the realization of this truth4 ,the highest degrees of ,evolution are found in semi-solid bodies1 or bodies that come midway between the two extremes specified4 ,even semi-solid bodies of the inorganic class1 exhibit the segregation of mixed units with comparative readiness3 witness the fact to which attention was first drawn by ,mr4 ,babbage1 that when the pasty mixture of ground flints and kaolin1 prepared for the manufacture of porcelain1 is kept some time1 it becomes gritty and unfit for use1 in consequence of the particles of silica separating themselves from the rest1 and uniting together in grains2 or witness the fact known to every housewife1 that in long-kept currant-jelly the sugar takes the shape of imbedded crystals4 ,while throughout the immense majority of the semi-solid bodies1 namely1 the organic bodies1 the proclivity to a re-arrangement of parts is so comparatively great1 as to be usually taken for a distinctive characteristic of them4 ,among organic bodies themselves1 we may trace contrasts having a like significance4 ,it is an accepted generalization that1 other things equal1 the rate of ,evolution is greatest where the plasticity is most marked4 ,in that portion of an egg which displays the formative processes during the early stages of incubation1 the changes of arrangement are more rapid than those which an equal portion of the body of a hatched chick undergoes4 ,as may be inferred from their respective powers to acquire habits and aptitudes1 the structural modifiability of a child is greater than that of an adult man2 and the structural modifiability of an adult man is greater than that of an old man3 contrasts which are accompanied by corresponding contrasts in the densities of the tissues2 since the ratio of water to solid matter diminishes with advancing age4 ,the most decisive proof1 however1 is furnished by those marked retardations or arrests of organic change1 that take place when the tissues suffer a great loss of water4 ,certain of the lower animals1 as the ,rotifera1 may be rendered apparently lifeless by desiccation1 and will yet revive when wetted3 as their substance passes from the fluid-solid to the solid state1 it ceases to be the seat of those changes which constitute functional activity and cause structural advance2 and such changes recommence as their substance passes from the solid to the fluid-solid state4 ,analogous instances occur among much higher animals4 ,when the ,african rivers which it inhabits are dried up1 the ,lepidosiren remains torpid in the hardened mud1 until the return of the rainy season brings water4 ,humboldt states that during the summer drought1 the alligators of the ,pampas lie buried in a state of suspended animation beneath the parched surface1 and struggle up out of the earth as soon as it becomes humid4 ,now though we have no proof that these partial arrests of vital activity1 are consequent on the reduction of the fluid-solid tissues to a more solid form2 yet their occurrence along with a cessation in the supply of water1 is reason for suspecting that this is the case4 ,and similarly1 though in the more numerous instances where loss of water leads to complete arrest of vital activity1 we are unable to say that the immediate cause is a stoppage of molecular changes that results from a diminution of molecular mobility2 yet it seems not improbable that this is the rationale of death by thirst4 ,probably few will expect to find this same condition to ,evolution1 illustrated in aggregates so widely different in kind as societies4 ,yet even here it may be shown that no considerable degree of ,evolution is exhibited1 where there is either great mobility of the parts1 or great immobility of them4 ,in such tribes as those inhabiting ,australia1 we see extremely little cohesion among the units3 there is neither that partial fixity of relative positions which results from the commencement of agriculture1 nor that partial fixity of relative positions implied by the establishment of social grades4 ,and along with this want of cohesion1 we find an absence of permanent differentiations4 ,conversely1 in societies of the oriental type1 where accumulated traditions1 laws1 and usages1 and long-fixed class-arrangements1 exercise great restraining power over individual actions1 we find ,evolution almost stopped4 ,through the medium of institutions and opinions1 the forces brought to bear on each unit by the rest1 are so great as to prevent the units from sensibly yielding to forces tending to re-arrange them4 ,the condition most favourable to increase of social heterogeneity1 is a medium coherence among the parts--a moderate facility of change in the relations of citizens1 joined with a moderate resistance to such change--a considerable freedom of individual actions1 qualified by a considerable restraint over individual actions--a certain attachment to pre-established arrangements1 and a certain readiness to be impelled by new influences into new arrangements--a compromise between fixity and unfixity such as that which we1 perhaps as much as any nation1 exhibit4 99 99 99 99 99 #ajb4 ,another condition to ,evolution1 of the same order as the last though of a different genus1 must be noted4 ,we have found that permanent re-arrangement among the units of an aggregate1 can take place only when they have neither extreme immobility nor extreme mobility4 ,the mobility and immobility thus far considered 7at least in all aggregates except social ones7 are those due to mechanical cohesion4 ,there is1 however1 what we must call chemical cohesion1 which also influences the mobility of the units1 and consequently the re-arrangement of them4 ,manifestly1 if two or more kinds of units contained in any aggregate1 are united by powerful affinities1 an incident force1 failing to destroy their cohesions1 will not cause such various re-arrangements as it would1 could it produce new chemical combinations as well as new mechanical adjustments4 ,on the other hand1 chemical affinities that are easily overcome1 must be favourable to multiplied re-arrangements of the units4 ,this condition1 as well as the preceding one1 is fulfilled in the highest degree1 by those aggregates which most variously display the transformation of the uniform into the multiform4 ,organic bodies are on the average distinguished from inorganic bodies1 by the readiness with which the compounds they consist of undergo decomposition1 and recomposition3 the chemical cohesions of their components are so comparatively small1 that small incident forces suffice to overcome them and cause transpositions of the components4 ,further1 between the two great divisions of organisms1 we find a contrast in the degree of ,evolution co-existing with a contrast in the degree of chemical modifiability4 ,as a class1 the nitrogenous compounds are peculiarly unstable2 and1 speaking generally1 these are present in much larger quantities in animal tissues than they are in vegetal tissues2 while1 speaking generally1 animals are much more heterogeneous than plants4 ,under this head it may be well also to point out that1 other things equal1 the structural variety which is possible in any aggregate1 must bear a relation to the number of kinds of units contained in the aggregate4 ,a body made up of units of one order1 cannot admit of so many different re-arrangements1 as one made up of units of two orders4 ,and each additional order of units must increase1 in a geometrical proportion1 the number of re-arrangements that may be made4 99 99 99 99 99 #ajc4 ,yet one more condition to be specified1 is the state of agitation in which the constituents of an aggregate are kept4 ,a familiar expedience will introduce us to this condition4 ,when a vessel has been filled to the brim with loose fragments1 shaking the vessel causes them to settle down into less space1 so that more may be put in4 ,and when among these fragments1 there are some of much greater specific gravity than the rest1 these will1 in the course of a prolonged shaking1 find their way to the bottom4 ,what now is the meaning of these two results1 when expressed in general terms8 ,we have a group of units acted on by an incident force--the attraction of the ,earth4 ,so long as these units are not agitated1 this incident force produces no changes in their relative positions2 agitate them1 and immediately their loose arrangement passes into a more compact arrangement4 ,again1 so long as they are not agitated1 the incident force cannot separate the heavier units from the lighter2 agitate them1 and immediately the heavier units begin to segregate4 ,by these illustrations1 a rude idea will be conveyed of the effect which vibration has in facilitating those re-arrangements which constitute ,evolution4 ,what here happens with visible units subject to visible oscillations1 happens also with invisible units subject to invisible oscillations4 ,one or two cases in which these oscillations are of mechanical origin1 may first be noted4 ,when a bar of steel is suspended in the magnetic meridian1 and repeatedly so struck as to send vibrations through it1 it becomes magnetized3 the magnetic force of the ,earth1 which does not permanently affect it while undisturbed1 alters its internal state when a mechanical agitation is propagated among its particles2 and the alteration is believed by physicists1 to be a molecular re-arrangement4 ,it may be fairly objected that this re-arrangement is hypothetical2 and did the fact stand alone1 it would be of little worth4 ,it gains significance1 however1 when joined with the fact that in the same substance1 long-continued mechanical vibrations are followed by molecular re-arrangements that are abundantly visible4 ,a piece of iron which1 when it leaves the workshop1 is fibrous in structure1 will become crystalline if exposed to a perpetual jar4 ,though the polar forces mutually exercised by the atoms1 fail to change their disorderly arrangement into an orderly arrangement while the atoms are relatively quiescent1 these forces produce this change when the atoms are kept in a state of intestine disturbance4 ,but the effects which visible oscillations and oscillations sensible to touch1 have in facilitating the re-arrangement of parts by an incident force1 are insignificant compared with the effects which insensible oscillations have in aiding such change of structure4 ,it is a doctrine now generally accepted among men of science1 that the particles of tangible matter1 as well as the particles of ether1 undulate4 ,as interpreted in conformity with this doctrine1 the heat of a body is simply its state of molecular motion4 ,a mass which feels cold1 is one having but slight molecular motion1 and conveying but slight molecular motion to the surrounding medium or to the hand touching it4 ,a mass hot enough to radiate a sensible warmth1 is one of which the more violently agitated molecules1 communicate increased undulations to the surrounding ethereal medium2 while the burn inflicted by it on the skin1 is the expression of increased undulations of the organic molecules4 ,such further heat as produces softening and a consequent distortion of the mass1 is an agitation so much augmented that the units can no longer completely maintain their relative positions4 ,fusion is an agitation so extreme1 that the relative positions of the units are changeable with ease4 ,when1 finally1 at a still higher temperature1 the liquid is transformed into a gas1 the explanation is1 that the oscillations are so violent as to overbalance that force which held the units in close contiguity--so violent as to keep the units at those relatively great distances apart to which they are now thrown4 ,since the establishment of the correlation between heat and motion first gave probability to this hypothesis1 it has been receiving various confirmations--especially by recent remarkable discoveries respecting the absorption of heat by gases4 ,prof4 ,tyndall has proved that the quantity of heat which any gas takes up from rays of heat passing through it1 has a distinct relation to the complexity of the atoms composing the gas4 ,the simple gases abstract but little2 the gases composed of binary atoms abstract1 say in round numbers1 a hundred times as much2 while the gases composed of atoms severally containing three1 four1 or more simple ones1 abstract something like a thousand times as much4 ,these differences ,prof4 ,tyndall regards as due to the different abilities of the different atoms to take up1 in the increase of their own undulations1 those undulations of the ethereal medium which constitute heat--an interpretation in perfect accordance with the late results of spectrum-analysis2 which go to show that the various elementary atoms1 when in an aeriform state1 intercept those luminiferous vibrations of the ether which are in unison or harmony with their own4 ,and since it holds of solid as of gaseous matters1 that those consisting of simple units transmit heat far more readily than those consisting of complex units2 we get confirmation of the inference otherwise reached1 that the units of matter in whatever state of aggregation they exist1 oscillate1 and that variations of temperature are variations in the amounts of their oscillations4 ,proceeding on this hypothesis1 which it would be out of place here to defend at greater length1 we have now to note how the re-arrangement of parts is facilitated by these insensible vibrations1 as we have seen it to be by sensible vibrations4 ,one or two cases of physical re-arrangement may first be noted4 ,when some molten glass is dropped into water1 and when its outside is thus1 by sudden solidification1 prevented from partaking in that contraction which the subsequent cooling of the inside tends to produce2 the units are left in such a state of tension1 that the mass flies into fragments if a small portion of it be broken off4 ,but now1 if this mass be kept for a day or two at a considerable heat1 though a heat not sufficient to alter its form or produce any sensible diminution of hardness1 this extreme brittleness disappears3 the component particles being thrown into greater agitation1 the tensile forces are enabled to re-arrange them into a state of equilibrium4 ,an illustration of another order is furnished by the subsidence of fine precipitates4 ,these sink down very slowly from solutions that are cold2 while warm solutions deposit them with comparative rapidity4 ,that is to say1 an increase of molecular vibration throughout the mass1 allows the suspended particles to separate more readily from the particles of fluid4 ,the effect of heat on chemical re-arrangement is so familiar1 that examples are scarcely needed4 ,be the substances concerned gaseous1 liquid1 or solid1 it equally holds that their chemical unions and disunions are aided by a rise of temperature4 ,affinities which do not suffice to effect the re-arrangement of mixed units that are in a state of feeble agitation1 suffice to effect it when the agitation is raised to a certain point4 ,and so long as this molecular motion is not great enough to prevent those chemical cohesions which the affinities tend to produce1 increase of it gives increased facility of chemical re-arrangement4 ,this condition1 in common with the preceding ones1 is fulfilled most completely in those aggregates which exhibit the phenomena of ,evolution in the highest degree2 namely1 the organic aggregates4 ,and throughout the various orders and states of these1 we find minor contrasts showing the relation between amount of molecular vibration and activity of the metamorphic changes4 ,such contrasts may be arranged in the several following groups4 ,speaking generally1 the phenomena of ,evolution are manifested in a much lower degree throughout the vegetal kingdom than throughout the animal kingdom2 and speaking generally1 the heat of plants is less than that of animals4 ,among plants themselves1 the organic changes vary in rate as the temperature varies4 ,though light is the agent which effects those molecular changes causing vegetal growth1 yet we see that in the absence of heat1 such changes are not effected3 in winter there is enough light1 but the heat being insufficient1 plant-life is suspended4 ,that this is the sole cause of the suspension1 is proved by the fact that at the same season1 plants contained in hot-houses1 where they receive even a smaller amount of light1 go on producing leaves and flowers4 ,a comparison of the several divisions of the animal kingdom with each other1 shows among them parallel relations4 ,regarded as a whole1 vertebrate animals are higher in temperature than invertebrate ones2 and they are as a whole higher in organic activity and development4 ,between subdivisions of the vertebrata themselves1 like differences in the state of molecular vibration1 accompany like differences in the degree of evolution4 ,the least heterogeneous of the vertebrata are the fishes2 and in most cases1 the heat of fishes is nearly the same as that of the water in which they swim3 only some of them being decidedly warmer4 ,though we habitually speak of reptiles as cold-blooded2 and though they have not much more power than fishes of maintaining a temperature above that of their medium2 yet since their medium 7which is1 in the majority of cases1 the air of warm climates7 is on the average warmer than the medium inhabited by fishes1 the temperature of the class of reptiles is higher than that of the class of fishes2 and we see in them a correspondingly higher complexity4 ,the much more active molecular agitation in mammals and birds1 is associated with a considerably greater multiformity of structure and a very much greater vivacity4 ,and though birds1 which are hotter blooded than mammals1 do not show us a greater multiformity2 yet1 judging from their apparently greater locomotive powers1 we may infer more rapid functional changes1 which1 equally with structural changes1 imply molecular re-arrangement4 ,the most instructive contrasts1 however1 are those presented by the same organic aggregates at different temperatures4 ,thus we see that ova undergoing development1 must be kept more or less warm--that in the absence of a certain molecular vibration1 the re-arrangement of parts does not go on4 ,we see1 again1 that in hybernating animals1 loss of heat carried to a particular point1 results in extreme retardation of the organic changes4 ,yet further1 we see that in animals which do not hybernate1 as in man1 prolonged exposure to extreme cold1 produces an irresistible tendency to sleep 7which implies a lowering of the functional activity72 and then1 if the abstraction of heat continues1 this sleep ends in death1 or arrest of functional activity4 ,lastly1 we see that when the temperature is lowered till the contained water solidifies1 there is a stoppage not only of those molecular re-arrangements which constitute life and development1 but also of those molecular re-arrangements which constitute decomposition4 ,evidently then1 both sensible and insensible agitations among the components of an aggregate1 facilitate any re-distributions to which there may be a tendency4 ,when that rhythmic change in the relative positions of the units which constitutes vibration1 is considerable1 the relative positions of the units more readily undergo permanent changes through the action of incident forces4 99 99 99 99 99 #ajd4 ,these special conditions to ,evolution1 are clearly but different forms of one general condition4 ,the abstract proposition1 that a permanent re-arrangement of units is possible only when they have neither absolute immobility nor absolute mobility with respect to each other1 we saw to be practically equivalent to the proposition1 that extreme cohesion and extreme want of cohesion among the units are unfavourable to ,evolution4 ,be this cohesion or want of cohesion that which physically characterizes the matter as we ordinarily know it2 be it that cohesion or want of cohesion distinguished as chemical2 or be it that cohesion or want of cohesion consequent on the degree of molecular vibration2 matters not1 in so far as the general conclusion is concerned4 ,inductively as well as deductively1 we find that the genesis of such permanent changes in the relative positions of parts1 as can be effected without destroying the continuity of the aggregate1 implies a medium stability in the relative positions of the parts3 be this stability physical1 chemical1 or that which varies with the state of agitation4 ,and as might be anticipated priori1 it is proved posteriori1 that this re-arrangement of parts goes on most actively in those aggregates whose units are moderately influenced by all these forces which affect their mobility4 ,here also may properly be added the remark1 that to effect these changes in the relative positions of parts1 the incident forces must range within certain limits4 ,it is wholly a question of the ratio between those agencies which hold the units in their positions1 and those agencies which tend to change their positions4 ,having given intensities in the powers that oppose re-arrangement1 there need proportionate intensities in the powers that work re-arrangement4 ,as there must be neither too great nor too little cohesion2 so there must be neither too little nor too great amounts of the influences antagonistic to cohesion4 ,while a slight mechanical strain produces no lasting alterations in the relative positions of parts1 an excessive mechanical strain causes disruption--causes so great an alteration in the relative positions of parts as to destroy their union in one aggregate4 ,while a very feeble chemical affinity brought to bear on the associated units1 fails to work any re-arrangement of them2 a chemical affinity that is extremely intense1 destroys their structural continuity1 and reduces such complex re-arrangements as have been made1 to comparatively simple ones4 ,and while in the absence of adequate thermal undulations1 the units have not freedom enough to obey the re-arranging influences impressed on them1 the incidence of violent thermal undulations gives them such extreme freedom that they break their connexions1 and the aggregate lapses into a liquid or gaseous form4 ,on the one hand1 therefore1 the statical forces which uphold the state of aggregation must not be so great as wholly to prevent those changes of relative position among the units which the dynamical forces tend to produce2 and1 on the other hand1 the dynamical forces must not be so great as wholly to overcome the statical forces1 and destroy the state of aggregation4 ,the excess of the dynamical forces must be sufficient to produce ,evolution1 but not sufficient to produce ,dissolution4 99 99 99 99 99 #aje4 ,and now we are naturally introduced to a consideration which1 though it does not come quite within the limits of this chapter as expressed in its title1 may yet be more conveniently dealt with here than elsewhere4 ,hitherto we have studied the metamorphosis of things1 only as exhibited in the changed distribution of matter4 ,it remains to look at it as exhibited in the changed distribution of motion4 ,the definition of ,evolution in its material aspect1 has to be supplemented by a definition of ,evolution in its dynamical aspect4 ,on inquiring the source of the sensible motions seen in every kind of ,evolution1 we find them all traceable to insensible motions2 either of that tangible matter which we perceive as constituting the objects around us1 or of that intangible matter which we infer as occupying space4 ,a brief reconsideration of the facts will make this obvious4 ,the formation of celestial bodies1 supposing it caused by the union of dispersed units1 must1 from the beginning1 have involved a diminished motion of these units with respect to each other2 and such motion as each resulting body acquired1 must previously have existed in the motions of its units4 ,if concrete matter has arisen by the aggregation of diffused matter1 then concrete motion has arisen by the aggregation of diffused motion4 ,that which now exists as the movement of masses1 implies the cessation of an equivalent molecular movement4 ,those transpositions of matter which constitute geological changes1 are clearly referable to the same source4 ,as before shown1 the denudation of lands and deposit of new strata1 are effected by water in the course of its descent from the clouds to the sea1 or during the arrest of those undulations produced on it by winds2 and1 as before shown1 the elevation of water to the height whence it fell1 is due to solar heat1 as is also the genesis of those aerial currents which drift it about when evaporated and agitate its surface when condensed4 ,that is to say1 the molecular motion of the etherial medium1 is transformed into the motion of gases1 thence into the motion of liquids1 and thence into the motion of solids--stages in each of which1 successively1 a certain amount of molecular motion is lost and an equivalent motion of masses produced4 ,if we seek the origin of vital movements1 we soon reach a like conclusion4 ,the actinic rays issuing from the ,sun1 enable the plant to reduce special elements existing in gaseous combination around it1 to a solid form1--enable the plant1 that is1 to grow and carry on its functional changes4 ,and since growth1 equally with circulation of sap1 is a mode of sensible motion1 while those rays which have been expended in generating it consist of insensible motions1 we have here1 too1 a transformation of the kind alleged4 ,animals1 derived as their forces are1 directly or indirectly1 from plants1 carry this transformation a step further4 ,the automatic movements of the viscera1 together with the voluntary movements of the limbs and body at large1 arise at the expense of certain molecular movements throughout the nervous and muscular tissues2 and these originally arose at the expense of certain other molecular movements propagated by the ,sun to the ,earth2 so that both the structural and functional motions which organic ,evolution displays1 are motions of aggregates generated by the arrested motions of units4 ,even with the aggregates of these aggregates the same rule holds4 ,for among associated men1 the progress is ever towards a merging of individual actions in the actions of corporate bodies4 ,an undeveloped society is composed of members between whom there is little concert3 they fulfil their several wants without mutual aid2 and only on occasions of aggression or defence1 act together--occasions on which their combination1 small as it is in extent1 frequently fails because it is so imperfect4 ,in the course of civilization1 however1 co-operation becomes step by step more decided4 ,as tribes grow into nations1 there result larger aggregates1 each of which has a joint political life--a common policy and movement with respect to other aggregates4 ,legislative and administrative progress1 involves an increase in the number of restraining agents brought into united and simultaneous action4 ,in military organization1 we see an advance from small undisciplined hordes of armed men1 to vast bodies of regular troops1 so drilled that the movements of the units are entirely subordinated to the movements of the masses4 ,nor does industrial development fail to show parallel changes4 ,beginning with independent workers1 and passing step by step to the employment of several assistants by one master1 there has ever been1 and still is1 a progress towards the co-operation of greater masses of labourers in the same establishment1 and towards the union of capitalists into more numerous and larger companies3 in both which kinds of combined action1 equivalent amounts of individual action disappear4 ,under all its forms1 then1 ,evolution1 considered dynamically1 is a decrease in the relative movements of parts1 and an increase in the relative movements of wholes--using the words parts and wholes in their widest senses4 ,from the infinitesimal motions of those infinitesimal units composing the etherial medium1 to the larger though still insensible motions of the larger though still insensible units composing gaseous1 fluid1 and solid matter1 and thence to the visible motions of visible aggregates1 the advance is from molecular motion to the motion of masses4 ,but now what of the converse process8 ,if the foregoing proposition is true1 then a change from the motion of masses to molecular motion1 is the opposite to ,evolution--is ,dissolution4 ,is this so8 ,of inorganic dissolution we have but little experience2 or at least1 our experience of it is on too small a scale to exhibit it as the antithesis of ,evolution4 ,we know1 indeed1 that when solids are dissolved in liquids1 their dissolution implies increased movements of their units1 at the expense of diminished movements among the units of their solvents2 and we know that when a liquid evaporates1 its dissipation or dissolution similarly implies greater relative movements of the units1 and decrease of such combined movement as they before had4 ,but since these small aggregates of inorganic matter1 do not exhibit the phenomena of ,evolution1 save in the form of simple integration2 so they do not exhibit the phenomena of dissolution1 save in the form of simple disintegration4 ,of organic dissolution1 however1 our experience suffices to show that it is a decrease of combined motion1 and an increase in the motion of uncombined parts4 ,the gradual cessation of functions1 vegetal or animal1 is a cessation of the sensible movements of fluids and solids4 ,in animals1 the impulsions of the body from place to place1 first cease2 presently the limbs cannot be stirred2 later still the respiratory actions stop2 finally the heart becomes stationary1 and1 with it1 the circulating fluids4 ,that is1 the transformation of molecular motion into the motion of masses1 comes to an end4 ,what next takes place8 ,we cannot say that sensible movements are transformed into insensible movements2 for sensible movements no longer exist4 ,nevertheless1 the process of decay involves an increase of insensible movements2 since this is far greater in the gases generated by decomposition1 than it is in the fluid-solid matters generating them4 ,indeed1 it might be contended that as1 during ,dissolution1 there is a change from the vibration of large compound atoms to the vibration of small and comparatively simple ones1 the process is strictly antithetical to that of ,evolution4 ,in conformity with the now current conception lately explained1 each of the highly complex chemical units composing an organic body1 possesses a rhythmic movement--a movement in which its many component units jointly partake4 ,when decomposition breaks up these highly complex atoms1 and their constituents assume a gaseous form1 there is both an increase of molecular motion implied by the diffusion1 and a further increase implied by the resolving of such motions as the aggregate atoms possessed1 into motions of their constituent atoms4 ,so that in organic dissolution we have1 first1 an end put to that transformation of the motion of units into the motion of aggregates1 which constitutes ,evolution1 dynamically considered2 and we have also1 though in a subtler sense1 a transformation of the motion of aggregates into the motion of units4 ,the formula equally applies to the dissolution of a society4 ,when social ties1 be they governmental or industrial1 are destroyed1 the combined actions of citizens lapse into uncombined actions4 ,those general forces which restrained individual doings1 having disappeared1 the only remaining restraints are those separately exercised by individuals on each other4 ,there are no longer any of the joint operations by which men satisfy their wants2 and1 in so far as they can1 they satisfy their wants by separate operations4 ,that is to say1 the movement of parts replaces the movement of wholes4 ,under its dynamical aspect then1 ,evolution1 so far as we can trace it1 is a change from molecular motion to the motion of masses2 while ,dissolution1 so far as we can trace it1 is a change from the motion of masses to molecular motion4 99 99 99 99 99 #ajf4 ,to these abstract definitions may be added concrete ones4 ,besides an integration of motions corresponding to the integration of masses1 ,evolution involves an increase in the multiformity of the motions1 corresponding to the increase in the multiformity of the masses4 ,if1 contemplating it as materially displayed1 we find ,evolution to consist in the change from an indefinite1 homogeneous distribution of parts to a definite1 heterogeneous distribution of parts2 then1 contemplating ,evolution as dynamically displayed1 it consists in a change from indefinite1 homogeneous motions to definite1 heterogeneous motions4 ,this change takes place under the form of an increased variety of rhythms4 ,we have already seen that all motion is rhythmical1 from the infinitesimal vibrations of infinitesimal molecules1 up to those vast oscillations between perihelion and aphelion performed by vast celestial bodies4 ,and as the contrast between these extreme cases suggests1 a multiplication of rhythms must accompany a multiplication in the degrees and modes of aggregation1 and in the relations of the aggregated masses to incident forces4 ,the degree or mode of aggregation will not1 indeed1 affect the rate or extent of rhythm where the incident force increases as the aggregate increases1 which is the case with gravitation3 here the only cause of variation in rhythm1 is difference of relation to the incident forces2 as we see in a pendulum1 which1 though unaffected in its movements by a change in the weight of the bob1 alters its rate of oscillation when taken to the equator4 ,but in all cases where the incident forces do not vary as the masses1 every new order of aggregation initiates a new order of rhythm3 witness the conclusion drawn from the recent researches into radiant heat and light1 that the atoms of different gases have different rates of undulation4 ,so that increased multiformity in the arrangement of matter1 has necessarily generated increased multiformity of rhythm2 both through increased variety in the sizes and forms of aggregates1 and through increased variety in their relations to the forces which move them4 ,the advancing heterogeneity of motion1 thus entailed by advancing heterogeneity in the distribution of matter1 does not1 however1 end here4 ,besides multiplication in the kinds of rhythm1 there is a progressing complexity in their combinations4 ,as there arise wholes composed of heterogeneous parts1 each of which has its own rhythm1 there must arise compound rhythms proportionately heterogeneous4 ,we before saw that this is visible even in the cyclical perturbations of the ,solar ,system--simple as are its structure and movements4 ,and when we contemplate highly-developed organic bodies1 we find the complication of rhythms so great1 that it defies definite analysis1 and from moment to moment works out in resultants that are incalculable4 ,this conception of ,evolution forms a needful complement to that on which we have hitherto chiefly dwelt4 ,to comprehend the phenomena in their entirety1 we have to contemplate both the increasing multiformity of parts1 and the increasing multiformity of the actions simultaneously assumed by these parts4 ,at the same time that there are differentiations and integrations of the matter1 there are differentiations and integrations of its motion4 ,and this increasingly heterogeneous distribution of motion1 constitutes ,evolution functionally considered2 as distinguished from that increasingly heterogeneous distribution of matter1 which constitutes ,evolution structurally considered4 ,while of course1 ,dissolution exhibits the transition to a reverse distribution1 both structurally and functionally4 99 99 99 99 99 #ajg4 ,one other preliminary must be set down4 ,when specifically interpreting ,evolution1 we shall have to consider under their concrete forms1 the various resolutions of force that follow its conflict with matter4 ,here it will be well to contemplate such resolutions under their most general or abstract forms4 ,any incident force is primarily resolvable or divisible into its effective and non-effective portions4 ,in mechanical impact1 the entire momentum of a striking body is never communicated to the body struck3 even under those most favourable conditions in which the striking body loses all its sensible motion1 there still remains with it a portion of the original momentum1 under the shape of that insensible motion produced among its particles by the collision4 ,of the light or heat falling on any mass1 a part1 more or less considerable1 is reflected2 and only the remaining part works molecular changes in the mass4 ,next it is to be noted that the effective force1 is itself divisible into the temporarily effective and the permanently effective4 ,the units of an aggregate acted on1 may undergo those rhythmical changes of relative position which constitute increased vibration1 as well as other changes of relative position which are not from instant to instant neutralized by opposite ones4 ,of these1 the first1 disappearing in the shape of radiating undulations1 leave the molecular arrangement as it originally was2 while the second conduce to that re-arrangement constituting ,evolution4 ,yet a further distinction has to be made4 ,the permanently effective force works out changes of relative position of two kinds--the insensible and the sensible4 ,the insensible transpositions among the units are those constituting what we call chemical composition and decomposition2 and it is these which we recognize as the qualitative differences that arise in an aggregate4 ,the sensible transpositions are such as result when certain of the units1 instead of being put into different relations with their immediate neighbours1 are carried away from them and united together elsewhere4 ,concerning these divisions and sub-divisions of any force affecting an aggregate1 the fact which it chiefly concerns us to observe1 is1 that they are complementary to each other4 ,of the whole incident force1 the effective must be that which remains after deducting the non-effective4 ,the two parts of the effective force must vary inversely as each other3 where much of it is temporarily effective1 little of it can be permanently effective2 and vice vers4 ,lastly1 the permanently effective force1 being expended in working both the insensible re-arrangements which constitute chemical modification1 and the sensible re-arrangements which result in structure1 must generate of either kind an amount that is great or small in proportion as it has generated a small or great amount of the other4 99 99 99 99 99 #ajh4 ,and now of the propositions grouped together in this chapter1 it may be well to remark that1 in common with foregoing propositions1 they have for their warrant the fundamental truth with which our synthesis set out4 ,that when a given force falls on any aggregate1 the permanently effective part of it will produce an amount of re-arrangement that is inversely proportional to the cohesion existing among the parts of the aggregate1 is demonstrable priori4 ,whether the cohesion be mechanical or chemical1 or whether it be temporarily modified by a changed degree of molecular vibration1 matters not to the general conclusion4 ,in all these cases it follows from the persistence of force1 that in proportion as the units offer great resistance to alteration in their relative positions1 must the amount of motion which a given force impresses on them be small4 ,the proposition is in fact an identical one2 since the cohesion of units is known to be great or small1 only by the smallness or greatness of the re-arrangement which a given incident force produces4 ,the continuity of motion we found to be a corollary from the persistence of force2 and from the continuity of motion1 it follows that molecular motion and the motion of masses can be respectively increased only at each other's expense4 ,hence1 if in the course of ,evolution there arises a motion of masses that did not before exist1 there must have ceased an equivalent molecular motion2 and if in the course of ,dissolution there arises a molecular motion that did not before exist1 an equivalent motion of masses must have disappeared4 ,equally necessary is the conclusion that the several results of the force expended on any aggregate1 must be complementary to each other4 ,it is not less obviously a corollary from the persistence of force1 that of the whole incident force the effective is the part which remains after deducting the non-effective2 than it is1 that of the effective force1 whatever does not work permanent results1 works temporary results1 and that such amount of the permanently effective force as is not absorbed in producing insensible re-arrangements1 will produce sensible re-arrangements4 ,,chapter ,,xiii4 ,,the ,,instability ,,of ,,the ,,homogeneous4#af #aji4 ,thus far our steps towards the interpretation of ,evolution have been preparatory4 ,we have dealt with the factors of the process1 rather than the process itself4 ,after the ultimate truth that1 ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force1 as cognizable by human intelligence1 can neither come into existence nor cease to exist1 we have considered certain other ultimate truths concerning the modes in which ,force and ,motion are manifested during the changes they produce in ,matter4 ,now we have to study the changes themselves4 ,we have here to analyze that re-arrangement in the parts of ,matter1 which occurs under the influence of ,force1 that is unchangeable in quantity though changeable in form1 through the medium of ,motion taking place rhythmically along lines of least resistance4 ,the proposition which comes first in logical order1 is1 that some re-arrangement must result2 and this proposition may be best dealt with under the more specific shape1 that the condition of homogeneity is a condition of unstable equilibrium4 ,first1 as to the meaning of the terms2 respecting which some readers may need explanation4 ,the phrase unstable equilibrium is one used in mechanics to express a balance of forces of such kind1 that the interference of any further force1 however minute1 will destroy the arrangement previously subsisting2 and bring about a totally different arrangement4 ,thus1 a stick poised on its lower end is in unstable equilibrium3 however exactly it may be placed in a perpendicular position1 as soon as it is left to itself it begins1 at first imperceptibly1 to lean on one side1 and with increasing rapidity falls into another attitude4 ,conversely1 a stick suspended from its upper end is in stable equilibrium3 however much disturbed1 it will return to the same position4 ,the proposition is1 then1 that the state of homogeneity1 like the state of the stick poised on its lower end1 is one that cannot be maintained4 ,let us take a few illustrations4 ,of mechanical ones the most familiar is that of the scales4 ,if they be accurately made1 and not clogged by dirt or rust1 it is impossible to keep a pair of scales perfectly balanced3 eventually one scale will descend and the other ascend--they will assume a heterogeneous relation4 ,again1 if we sprinkle over the surface of a fluid a number of equal-sized particles1 having an attraction for each other1 they will1 no matter how uniformly distributed1 by and by concentrate irregularly into one or more groups4 ,were it possible to bring a mass of water into a state of perfect homogeneity--a state of complete quiescence1 and exactly equal density throughout--yet the radiation of heat from neighbouring bodies1 by affecting differently its different parts1 would inevitably produce inequalities of density and consequent currents2 and would so render it to that extent heterogeneous4 ,take a piece of red-hot matter1 and however evenly heated it may at first be1 it will quickly cease to be so3 the exterior1 cooling faster than the interior1 will become different in temperature from it4 ,and the lapse into heterogeneity of temperature1 so obvious in this extreme case1 takes place more or less in all cases4 ,the action of chemical forces supplies other illustrations4 ,expose a fragment of metal to air or water1 and in course of time it will be coated with a film of oxide1 carbonate1 or other compound3 that is--its outer parts will become unlike its inner parts4 ,usually the heterogeneity produced by the action of chemical forces on the surfaces of masses1 is not striking2 because the changed portions are soon washed away1 or otherwise removed4 ,but if this is prevented1 comparatively complex structures result4 ,quarries of trap-rock contain some striking examples4 ,not unfrequently a piece of trap may be found reduced1 by the action of the weather1 to a number of loosely-adherent coats1 like those of an onion4 ,where the block has been quite undisturbed1 we may trace the whole series of these1 from the angular1 irregular outer one1 through successively included ones in which the shape becomes gradually rounded1 ending finally in a spherical nucleus4 ,on comparing the original mass of stone with this group of concentric coats1 each of which differs from the rest in form1 and probably in the state of decomposition at which it has arrived1 we get a marked illustration of the multiformity to which1 in lapse of time1 a uniform body may be brought by external chemical action4 ,the instability of the homogeneous is equally seen in the changes set up throughout the interior of a mass1 when it consists of units that are not rigidly bound together4 ,the atoms of a precipitate never remain separate1 and equably distributed through the fluid in which they make their appearance4 ,they aggregate either into crystalline grains1 each containing an immense number of atoms1 or they aggregate into flocculi1 each containing a yet larger number2 and where the mass of fluid is great1 and the process prolonged1 these flocculi do not continue equidistant1 but break up into groups4 ,that is to say1 there is a destruction of the balance at first subsisting among the diffused particles1 and also of the balance at first subsisting among the groups into which these particles unite4 ,certain solutions of non-crystalline substances in highly volatile liquids1 exhibit in the course of half an hour a whole series of changes that are set up in the alleged way4 ,if for example a little shell-lac-varnish 7made by dissolving shell-lac in coal-naphtha until it is of the consistence of cream7 be poured on a piece of paper1 the surface of the varnish will shortly become marked by polygonal divisions1 which1 first appearing round the edge of the mass1 spread towards its centre4 ,under a lense these irregular polygons of five or more sides1 are seen to be severally bounded by dark lines1 on each side of which there are light-coloured borders4 ,by the addition of matter to their inner edges1 the borders slowly broaden1 and thus encroach on the areas of the polygons2 until at length there remains nothing but a dark spot in the centre of each4 ,at the same time the boundaries of the polygons become curved2 and they end by appearing like spherical sacs pressed together2 strangely simulating 7but only simulating7 a group of nucleated cells4 ,here a rapid loss of homogeneity is exhibited in three ways3--,first1 in the formation of the film1 which is the seat of these changes2 second1 in the formation of the polygonal sections into which this film divides2 and third1 in the contrast that arises between the polygonal sections round the edge1 where they are small and early formed1 and those in the centre which are larger and formed later4 ,the instability thus variously illustrated is obviously consequent on the fact1 that the several parts of any homogeneous aggregation are necessarily exposed to different forces--forces that differ either in kind or amount2 and being exposed to different forces they are of necessity differently modified4 ,the relations of outside and inside1 and of comparative nearness to neighbouring sources of influence1 imply the reception of influences that are unlike in quantity or quality1 or both2 and it follows that unlike changes will be produced in the parts thus dissimilarly acted upon4 ,for like reasons it is manifest that the process must repeat itself in each of the subordinate groups of units that are differentiated by the modifying forces4 ,each of these subordinate groups1 like the original group1 must gradually1 in obedience to the influences acting upon it1 lose its balance of parts--must pass from a uniform into a multiform state4 ,and so on continuously4 ,whence indeed it is clear that not only must the homogeneous lapse into the non-homogeneous1 but that the more homogeneous must tend ever to become less homogeneous4 ,if any given whole1 instead of being absolutely uniform throughout1 consist of parts distinguishable from each other--if each of these parts1 while somewhat unlike other parts1 is uniform within itself2 then1 each of them being in unstable equilibrium1 it follows that while the changes set up within it must render it multiform1 they must at the same time render the whole more multiform than before4 ,the general principle1 now to be followed out in its applications1 is thus somewhat more comprehensive than the title of the chapter implies4 ,no demurrer to the conclusions drawn1 can be based on the ground that perfect homogeneity nowhere exists2 since1 whether that state with which we commence be or be not one of perfect homogeneity1 the process must equally be towards a relative heterogeneity4 99 99 99 99 99 #aaj4 ,the stars are distributed with a three-fold irregularity4 ,there is first the marked contrast between the plane of the milky way and other parts of the heavens1 in respect of the quantities of stars within given visual areas4 ,there are secondary contrasts of like kind in the milky way itself1 which has its thick and thin places2 as well as throughout the celestial spaces in general1 which are much more closely strewn in some regions than in others4 ,and there is a third order of contrasts produced by the aggregation of stars into small clusters4 ,besides this heterogeneity of distribution of the stars in general1 considered without distinction of kinds1 a further such heterogeneity is disclosed when they are classified by their differences of colour1 which doubtless answer to differences of physical constitution4 ,while the yellow stars are found in all parts of the heavens1 the red and blue stars are not so3 there are wide regions in which both red and blue stars are rare2 there are regions in which the blue occur in considerable numbers1 and there are other regions in which the red are comparatively abundant4 ,yet one more irregularity of like significance is presented by the nebul1--aggregations of matter which1 whatever be their nature1 most certainly belong to our sidereal system4 ,for the nebul are not dispersed with anything like uniformity2 but are abundant around the poles of the galactic circle and rare in the neighbourhood of its plane4 ,no one will expect that anything like a definite interpretation of this structure can be given on the hypothesis of ,evolution1 or any other hypothesis4 ,the most that can be looked for is some reason for thinking that irregularities1 not improbably of these kinds1 would occur in the course of ,evolution1 supposing it to have taken place4 ,any one called on to assign such reason might argue1 that if the matter of which stars and all other celestial bodies consist1 be assumed to have originally existed in a diffused form throughout a space far more vast even than that which our sidereal system now occupies1 the instability of the homogeneous would negative its continuance in that state4 ,in default of an absolute balance among the forces with which the dispersed particles acted on each other 7which could not exist in any aggregation having limits7 he might show that motion and consequent changes of distribution would necessarily result4 ,the next step in the argument would be that in matter of such extreme tenuity and feeble cohesion there would be motion towards local centres of gravity1 as well as towards the general centre of gravity2 just as1 to use a humble illustration1 the particles of a precipitate aggregate into flocculi at the same time that they sink towards the earth4 ,he might urge that in the one case as in the other1 these smallest and earliest local aggregations must gradually divide into groups1 each concentrating to its own centre of gravity1--a process which must repeat itself on a larger and larger scale4 ,in conformity with the law that motion once set up in any direction becomes itself a cause of subsequent motion in that direction1 he might further infer that the heterogeneities thus set up would tend ever to become more pronounced4 ,established mechanical principles would justify him in the conclusion that the motions of these irregular masses of slightly aggregated nebular matter towards their common centre of gravity must be severally rendered curvelinear1 by the resistance of the medium from which they were precipitated2 and that in consequence of the irregularities of distribution already set up1 such conflicting curvelinear motions must1 by composition of forces1 end in a rotation of the incipient sidereal system4 ,he might without difficulty show that the resulting centrifugal force must so far modify the process of general aggregation1 as to prevent anything like uniform distribution of the stars eventually formed--that there must arise a contrast such as we see between the galactic circle and the rest of the heavens4 ,he might draw the further not unwarrantable inference1 that differences in the process of local concentration would probably result from the unlikeness between the physical conditions existing around the general axis of rotation and those existing elsewhere4 ,to which he might add1 that after the formation of distinct stars1 the ever-increasing irregularities of distribution due to continuance of the same causes would produce that patchiness which distinguishes the heavens in both its larger and smaller areas4 ,we need not here however commit ourselves to such far-reaching speculations4 ,for the purposes of the general argument it is needful only to show1 that any finite mass of diffused matter1 even though vast enough to form our whole sidereal system1 could not be in stable equilibrium2 that in default of absolute sphericity1 absolute uniformity of composition1 and absolute symmetry of relation to all forces external to it2 its concentration must go on with an ever-increasing irregularity2 and that thus the present aspect of the heavens is not1 so far as we can judge1 incongruous with the hypothesis of a general evolution consequent on the instability of the homogeneous4 ,descending to that more limited form of the nebular hypothesis which regards the solar system as having resulted by gradual concentration2 and assuming this concentration to have advanced so far as to produce a rotating spheroid of nebulous matter2 let us consider what further consequence the instability of the homogeneous necessitates4 ,having become oblate in figure1 unlike in the densities of its centre and surface1 unlike in their temperatures1 and unlike in the velocities with which its parts move round their common axis1 such a mass can no longer be called homogeneous2 and therefore any further changes exhibited by it as a whole1 can illustrate the general law1 only as being changes from a more homogeneous to a less homogeneous state4 ,changes of this kind are to be found in the transformations of such of its parts as are still homogeneous within themselves4 ,if we accept the conclusion of ,laplace1 that the equatorial portion of this rotating and contracting spheroid will at successive stages acquire a centrifugal force great enough to prevent any nearer approach to the centre round which it rotates1 and will so be left behind by the inner parts of the spheroid in its still-continued contraction2 we shall find1 in the fate of the detached ring1 a fresh exemplification of the principle we are following out4 ,consisting of gaseous matter1 such a ring1 even if absolutely uniform at the time of its detachment1 cannot continue so4 ,to maintain its equilibrium there must be an almost perfect uniformity in the action of all external forces upon it 7almost1 we must say1 because the cohesion1 even of extremely attenuated matter1 might suffice to neutralize very minute disturbances72 and against this the probabilities are immense4 ,in the absence of equality among the forces1 internal and external1 acting on such a ring1 there must be a point or points at which the cohesion of its parts is less than elsewhere--a point or points at which rupture will therefore take place4 ,laplace assumed that the ring would rupture at one place only2 and would then collapse on itself4 ,but this is a more than questionable assumption--such at least ,i know to be the opinion of an authority second to none among those now living4 ,so vast a ring1 consisting of matter having such feeble cohesion1 must break up into many parts4 ,nevertheless1 it is still inferrable from the instability of the homogeneous1 that the ultimate result which ,laplace predicted would take place4 ,for even supposing the masses of nebulous matter into which such a ring separated1 were so equal in their sizes and distances as to attract each other with exactly equal forces 7which is infinitely improbable72 yet the unequal action of external disturbing forces would inevitably destroy their equilibrium--there would be one or more points at which adjacent masses would begin to part company4 ,separation once commenced1 would with ever-accelerating speed lead to a grouping of the masses4 ,and obviously a like result would eventually take place with the groups thus formed2 until they at length aggregated into a single mass4 ,leaving the region of speculative astronomy1 let us consider the ,solar ,system as it at present exists4 ,and here it will be well1 in the first place1 to note a fact which may be thought at variance with the foregoing argument--namely1 the still-continued existence of ,saturn's rings2 and especially of the internal nebulous ring lately discovered4 ,to the objection that the outer rings maintain their equilibrium1 the reply is that the comparatively great cohesion of liquid or solid substance would suffice to prevent any slight tendency to rupture from taking effect4 ,and that a nebulous ring here still preserves its continuity1 does not really negative the foregoing conclusion2 since it happens under the quite exceptional influence of those symmetrically disposed forces which the external rings exercise on it4 ,here indeed it deserves to be noted1 that though at first sight the ,saturnian system appears at variance with the doctrine that a state of homogeneity is one of unstable equilibrium1 it does in reality furnish a curious confirmation of this doctrine4 ,for ,saturn is not quite concentric with his rings2 and it has been proved mathematically that were he and his rings concentrically situated1 they could not remain so3 the homogeneous relation being unstable1 would gravitate into a heterogeneous one4 ,and this fact serves to remind us of the allied one presented throughout the whole ,solar ,system4 ,all orbits1 whether of planets or satellites1 are more or less excentric--none of them are perfect circles2 and were they perfect circles they would soon become ellipses4 ,mutual perturbations would inevitably generate excentricities4 ,that is to say1 the homogeneous relations would lapse into heterogeneous ones4 99 99 99 99 99 #aaa4 ,already so many references have been made to the gradual formation of a crust over the originally incandescent ,earth1 that it may be thought superfluous again to name it4 ,it has not1 however1 been before considered in connexion with the general principle under discussion4 ,here then it must be noted as a necessary consequence of the instability of the homogeneous4 ,in this cooling down and solidification of the ,earth's surface1 we have one of the simplest1 as well as one of the most important1 instances1 of that change from a uniform to a multiform state which occurs in any mass through exposure of its different parts to different conditions4 ,to the differentiation of the ,earth's exterior from its interior thus brought about1 we must add one of the most conspicuous differentiations which the exterior itself afterwards undergoes1 as being similarly brought about4 ,were the conditions to which the surface of the ,earth is exposed1 alike in all directions1 there would be no obvious reason why certain of its parts should become permanently unlike the rest4 ,but being unequally exposed to the chief external centre of force--the ,sun--its main divisions become unequally modified3 as the crust thickens and cools1 there arises that contrast1 now so decided1 between the polar and equatorial regions4 ,along with these most marked physical differentiations of the ,earth1 which are manifestly consequent on the instability of the homogeneous1 there have been going on numerous chemical differentiations1 admitting of similar interpretation4 ,without raising the question whether1 as some think1 the so-called simple substances are themselves compounded of unknown elements 7elements which we cannot separate by artificial heat1 but which existed separately when the heat of the ,earth was greater than any which we can produce71--without raising this question1 it will suffice the present purpose to show how1 in place of that comparative homogeneity of the ,earth's crust1 chemically considered1 which must have existed when its temperature was high1 there has arisen1 during its cooling1 an increasing chemical heterogeneity3 each element or compound1 being unable to maintain its homogeneity in presence of various surrounding affinities1 having fallen into heterogeneous combinations4 ,let us contemplate this change somewhat in detail4 ,there is every reason to believe that at an extreme heat1 the bodies we call elements cannot combine4 ,even under such heat as can be generated artificially1 some very strong affinities yield2 and the great majority of chemical compounds are decomposed at much lower temperatures4 ,whence it seems not improbable that1 when the ,earth was in its first state of incandescence1 there were no chemical combinations at all4 ,but without drawing this inference1 let us set out with the unquestionable fact that the compounds which can exist at the highest temperatures1 and which must therefore have been the first formed as the ,earth cooled1 are those of the simplest constitutions4 ,the protoxides--including under that head the alkalies1 earths1 c4--are1 as a class1 the most fixed compounds known3 the majority of them resisting decomposition by any heat we can generate4 ,these1 consisting severally of one atom of each component element1 are combinations of the simplest order--are but one degree less homogeneous than the elements themselves4 ,more heterogeneous than these1 more decomposable by heat1 and therefore later in the ,earth's history1 are the deutoxides1 tritoxides1 peroxides1 c42 in which two1 three1 four1 or more atoms of oxygen are united with one atom of metal or other base4 ,still less able to resist heat1 are the salts2 which present us with compound atoms each made up of five1 six1 seven1 eight1 ten1 twelve1 or more atoms1 of three1 if not more1 kinds4 ,then there are the hydrated salts1 of a yet greater heterogeneity1 which undergo partial decomposition at much lower temperatures4 ,after them come the further-complicated supersalts and double salts1 having a stability again decreased2 and so throughout4 ,after making a few unimportant qualifications demanded by peculiar affinities1 ,i believe no chemist will deny it to be a general law of these inorganic combinations that1 other things equal1 the stability decreases as the complexity increases4 ,and then when we pass to the compounds that make up organic bodies1 we find this general law still further exemplified3 we find much greater complexity and much less stability4 ,an atom of albumen1 for instance1 consists of #dhb ultimate atoms of five different kinds4 ,fibrine1 still more intricate in constitution1 contains in each atom1 #bih atoms of carbon1 #di of nitrogen1 #b of sulphur1 #bbh of hydrogen1 and #ib of oxygen--in all1 #ffj atoms2 or1 more strictly speaking--equivalents4 ,and these two substances are so unstable as to decompose at quite moderate temperatures2 as that to which the outside of a joint of roast meat is exposed4 ,possibly it will be objected that some inorganic compounds1 as phosphuretted hydrogen and chloride of nitrogen1 are more decomposable than most organic compounds4 ,this is true4 ,but the admission may be made without damage to the argument4 ,the proposition is not that all simple combinations are more fixed than all complex ones4 ,to establish our inference it is necessary only to show that1 as an average fact1 the simple combinations can exist at a higher temperature than the complex ones4 ,and this is wholly beyond question4 ,thus it is manifest that the present chemical heterogeneity of the ,earth's surface has arisen by degrees as the decrease of heat has permitted2 and that it has shown itself in three forms--first1 in the multiplication of chemical compounds2 second1 in the greater number of different elements contained in the more modern of these compounds2 and third1 in the higher and more varied multiples in which these more numerous elements combine4 ,without specifying them1 it will suffice just to name the meteorologic processes eventually set up in the ,earth's atmosphere1 as further illustrating the alleged law4 ,they equally display that destruction of a homogeneous state which results from unequal exposure to incident forces4 99 99 99 99 99 #aab4 ,take a mass of unorganized but organizable matter--either the body of one of the lowest living forms1 or the germ of one of the higher4 ,consider its circumstances4 ,either it is immersed in water or air1 or it is contained within a parent organism4 ,wherever placed1 however1 its outer and inner parts stand differently related to surrounding agencies--nutriment1 oxygen1 and the various stimuli4 ,but this is not all4 ,whether it lies quiescent at the bottom of the water or on the leaf of a plant2 whether it moves through the water preserving some definite attitude2 or whether it is in the inside of an adult2 it equally results that certain parts of its surface are more exposed to surrounding agencies than other parts--in some cases more exposed to light1 heat1 or oxygen1 and in others to the maternal tissues and their contents4 ,hence must follow the destruction of its original equilibrium4 ,this may take place in one of two ways4 ,either the disturbing forces may be such as to overbalance the affinities of the organic elements1 in which case there result those changes which are known as decomposition2 or1 as is ordinarily the case1 such changes are induced as do not destroy the organic compounds1 but only modify them3 the parts most exposed to the modifying forces being most modified4 ,to elucidate this1 suppose we take a few cases4 ,note first what appear to be exceptions4 ,certain minute animal forms present us either with no appreciable differentiations or with differentiations so obscure as to be made out with great difficulty4 ,in the ,rhizopods1 the substance of the jelly-like body remains throughout life unorganized1 even to the extent of having no limiting membrane2 as is proved by the fact that the thread-like processes protruded by the mass1 coalesce on touching each other4 ,whether or not the nearly allied ,amba1 of which the less numerous and more bulky processes do not coalesce1 has1 as lately alleged1 something like a cell-wall and a nucleus1 it is clear that the distinction of parts is very slight2 since particles of food pass bodily into the inside through any part of the periphery1 and since when the creature is crushed to pieces1 each piece behaves as the whole did4 ,now these cases1 in which there is either no contrast of structure between exterior and interior or very little1 though seemingly opposed to the above inference1 are really very significant evidences of its truth4 ,for what is the peculiarity of this division of the ,protozoa8 ,its members undergo perpetual and irregular changes of form--they show no persistent relation of parts4 ,what lately formed a portion of the interior is now protruded1 and1 as a temporary limb1 is attached to some object it happens to touch4 ,what is now a part of the surface will presently be drawn1 along with the atom of nutriment sticking to it1 into the centre of the mass4 ,either the relations of inner and outer have no permanent existence1 or they are very slightly marked4 ,but by the hypothesis1 it is only because of their unlike positions with respect to modifying forces1 that the originally like units of a living mass become unlike4 ,we must therefore expect no established differentiation of parts in creatures which exhibit no established differences of position in their parts2 and we must expect extremely little differentiation of parts where the differences of position are but little determined--which is just what we find4 ,this negative evidence is borne out by positive evidence4 ,when we turn from these proteiform specks of living jelly to organisms having an unchanging distribution of substance1 we find differences of tissue corresponding to differences of relative position4 ,in all the higher ,protozoa1 as also in the ,protophyta1 we meet with a fundamental differentiation into cell-membrane and cell-contents2 answering to that fundamental contrast of conditions implied by the terms outside and inside4 ,on passing from what are roughly classed as unicellular organisms1 to the lowest of those which consist of aggregated cells1 we equally observe the connection between structural differences and differences of circumstance4 ,negatively1 we see that in the sponge1 permeated throughout by currents of sea-water1 the indefiniteness of organization corresponds with the absence of definite unlikeness of conditions3 the peripheral and central portions are as little contrasted in structure as in exposure to surrounding agencies4 ,while positively1 we see that in a form like the ,thalassicolla1 which1 though equally humble1 maintains its outer and inner parts in permanently unlike circumstances1 there is displayed a rude structure obviously subordinated to the primary relations of centre and surface3 in all its many and important varieties1 the parts exhibit a more or less concentric arrangement4 ,after this primary modification1 by which the outer tissues are differentiated from the inner1 the next in order of constancy and importance is that by which some part of the outer tissues is differentiated from the rest2 and this corresponds with the almost universal fact that some part of the outer tissues is more exposed to certain environing influences than the rest4 ,here1 as before1 the apparent exceptions are extremely significant4 ,some of the lowest vegetal organisms1 as the ,hematococci and ,protococci1 evenly imbedded in a mass of mucus1 or dispersed through the ,arctic snow1 display no differentiations of surface2 the several parts of their surfaces being subjected to no definite contrasts of conditions4 ,ciliated spheres such as the ,volvox have no parts of their periphery unlike other parts2 and it is not to be expected that they should have2 since1 as they revolve in all directions1 they do not1 in traversing the water1 permanently expose any part to special conditions4 ,but when we come to organisms that are either fixed1 or while moving preserve definite attitudes1 we no longer find uniformity of surface4 ,the most general fact which can be asserted with respect to the structures of plants and animals1 is1 that however much alike in shape and texture the various parts of the exterior may at first be1 they acquire unlikenesses corresponding to the unlikenesses of their relations to surrounding agencies4 ,the ciliated germ of a ,zoophyte1 which1 during its locomotive stage1 is distinguishable only into outer and inner tissues1 no sooner becomes fixed1 than its upper end begins to assume a different structure from its lower4 ,the disc-shaped gemm of the ,marchantia1 originally alike on both surfaces1 and falling at random with either side uppermost1 immediately begin to develop rootlets on the under side1 and stomata on the upper side3 a fact proving beyond question1 that this primary differentiation is determined by this fundamental contrast of conditions4 ,of course in the germs of higher organisms1 the metamorphoses immediately due to the instability of the homogeneous1 are soon masked by those due to the assumption of the hereditary type4 ,such early changes1 however1 as are common to all classes of organisms1 and so cannot be ascribed to heredity1 entirely conform to the hypothesis4 ,a germ which has undergone no developmental modifications1 consists of a spheroidal group of homogeneous cells4 ,universally1 the first step in its evolution is the establishment of a difference between some of the peripheral cells and the cells which form the interior--some of the peripheral cells1 after repeated spontaneous fissions1 coalesce into a membrane2 and by continuance of the process this membrane spreads until it speedily invests the entire mass1 as in mammals1 or1 as in birds1 stops short of that for some time4 ,here we have two significant facts4 ,the first is1 that the primary unlikeness arises between the exterior and the interior4 ,the second is1 that the change which thus initiates development1 does not take place simultaneously over the whole exterior2 but commences at one place1 and gradually involves the rest4 ,now these facts are just those which might be inferred from the instability of the homogeneous4 ,the surface must1 more than any other part1 become unlike the centre1 because it is most dissimilarly conditioned2 and all parts of the surface cannot simultaneously exhibit this differentiation1 because they cannot be exposed to the incident forces with absolute uniformity4 ,one other general fact of like implication remains4 ,whatever be the extent of this peripheral layer of cells1 or blastoderm as it is called1 it presently divides into two layers--the serous and mucous2 or1 as they have been otherwise called1 the ectoderm and the endoderm4 ,the first of these is formed from that portion of the layer which lies in contact with surrounding agents2 and the second of them is formed from that portion of the layer which lies in contact with the contained mass of yelk4 ,that is to say1 after the primary differentiation1 more or less extensive1 of surface from centre1 the resulting superficial portion undergoes a secondary differentiation into inner and outer parts--a differentiation which is clearly of the same order with the preceding1 and answers to the next most marked contrast of conditions4 ,but1 as already hinted1 this principle1 understood in the simple form here presented1 supplies no key to the detailed phenomena of organic development4 ,it fails entirely to explain generic and specific peculiarities2 and indeed leaves us equally in the dark respecting those more important distinctions by which families and orders are marked out4 ,why two ova1 similarly exposed in the same pool1 should become the one a fish1 and the other a reptile1 it cannot tell us4 ,that from two different eggs placed under the same hen1 should respectively come forth a duckling and a chicken1 is a fact not to be accounted for on the hypothesis above developed4 ,we have here no alternative but to fall back upon the unexplained principle of hereditary transmission4 ,the capacity possessed by an unorganized germ of unfolding into a complex adult1 which repeats ancestral traits in the minutest details1 and that even when it has been placed in conditions unlike those of its ancestors1 is a capacity we cannot at present understand4 ,that a microscopic portion of seemingly structureless matter should embody an influence of such kind1 that the resulting man will in fifty years after become gouty or insane1 is a truth which would be incredible were it not daily illustrated4 ,should it however turn out1 as we shall hereafter find reason for suspecting1 that these complex differentiations which adults exhibit1 are themselves the slowly accumulated and transmitted results of a process like that seen in the first changes of the germ2 it will follow that even those embryonic changes due to hereditary influence1 are remote consequences of the alleged law4 ,should it be shown that the slight modifications wrought during life on each adult1 and bequeathed to offspring along with all like preceding modifications1 are themselves unlikenesses of parts that are produced by unlikenesses of conditions2 then it will follow that the modifications displayed in the course of embryonic development1 are partly direct consequences of the instability of the homogeneous1 and partly indirect consequences of it4 ,to give reasons for entertaining this hypothesis1 however1 is not needful for the justification of the position here taken4 ,it is enough that the most conspicuous differentiations which incipient organisms universally display1 correspond to the most marked differences of conditions to which their parts are subject4 ,it is enough that the habitual contrast between outside and inside1 which we know is produced in inorganic masses by unlikeness of exposure to incident forces1 is strictly paralleled by the first contrast that makes its appearance in all organic masses4 ,it remains to point out that in the assemblage of organisms constituting a species1 the principle enunciated is equally traceable4 ,we have abundant materials for the induction that each species will not remain uniform1 but is ever becoming to some extent multiform2 and there is ground for the deduction that this lapse from homogeneity to heterogeneity is caused by the subjection of its members to unlike sets of circumstances4 ,the fact that in every species1 animal and vegetal1 the individuals are never quite alike2 joined with the fact that there is in every species a tendency to the production of differences marked enough to constitute varieties2 form a sufficiently wide basis for the induction4 ,while the deduction is confirmed by the familiar experience that varieties are most numerous and decided where1 as among cultivated plants and domestic animals1 the conditions of life depart from the original ones1 most widely and in the most numerous ways4 ,whether we regard 8natural selection0 as wholly1 or only in part1 the agency through which varieties are established1 matters not to the general conclusion4 ,for as the survival of any variety proves its constitution to be in harmony with a certain aggregate of surrounding forces--as the multiplication of a variety and the usurpation by it of an area previously occupied by some other part of the species1 implies different effects produced by such aggregate of forces on the two1 it is clear that this aggregate of forces is the real cause of the differentiation--it is clear that if the variety supplants the original species in some localities but not in others1 it does so because the aggregate of forces in the one locality is unlike that in the other--it is clear that the lapse of the species from a state of homogeneity to a state of heterogeneity arises from the exposure of its different parts to different aggregates of forces4 99 99 99 99 99 #aac4 ,among mental phenomena it is difficult to establish the alleged law without an analysis too extensive for the occasion4 ,to show satisfactorily how states of consciousness1 originally homogeneous1 become heterogeneous through differences in the changes wrought by different forces1 would require us carefully to trace out the organization of early experiences4 ,were this done it would become manifest that the development of intelligence1 is1 under one of its chief aspects1 a dividing into separate classes1 the unlike things previously confounded together in one class--a formation of sub-classes and sub-sub-classes1 until the once confused aggregate of objects known1 is resolved into an aggregate which unites extreme heterogeneity among its multiplied groups1 with complete homogeneity among the members of each group4 ,if1 for example1 we followed1 through ascending grades of creatures1 the genesis of that vast structure of knowledge acquired by sight1 we should find that in the first stage1 where eyes suffice for nothing beyond the discrimination of light from darkness1 the only possible classifications of objects seen1 must be those based on the manner in which light is obstructed1 and the degree in which it is obstructed4 ,we should find that by such undeveloped visual organs1 the shadows traversing the rudimentary retina would be merely distinguished into those of the stationary objects which the creature passed during its own movements1 and those of the moving objects which came near the creature while it was at rest2 and that so the extremely general classification of visible things into stationary and moving1 would be the earliest formed4 ,we should find that whereas the simplest eyes are not fitted to distinguish between an obstruction of light caused by a small object close to1 and an obstruction caused by a large object at some distance1 eyes a little more developed must be competent to such a distinction2 whence must result a vague differentiation of the class of moving objects1 into the nearer and the more remote4 ,we should find that such further improvements in vision as those which make possible a better estimation of distances by adjustment of the optic axes1 and those which1 through enlargement and subdivision of the retina1 make possible the discrimination of shapes1 must have the effects of giving greater definiteness to the classes already formed1 and of sub-dividing these into smaller classes1 consisting of objects less unlike4 ,and we should find that each additional refinement of the perceptive organs1 must similarly lead to a multiplication of divisions and a sharpening of the limits of each division4 ,in every infant might be traced the analogous transformation of a confused aggregate of impressions of surrounding objects1 not recognized as differing in their distances1 sizes1 and shapes1 into separate classes of objects unlike each other in these and various other respects4 ,and in the one case as in the other1 it might be shown that the change from this first indefinite1 incoherent and comparatively homogeneous consciousness1 to a definite1 coherent1 and heterogeneous one1 is due to differences in the actions of incident forces on the organism4 ,these brief indications of what might be shown1 did space permit1 must here suffice4 ,probably they will give adequate clue to an argument by which each reader may satisfy himself that the course of mental evolution offers no exception to the general law4 ,in further aid of such an argument1 ,i will here add an illustration that is comprehensible apart from the process of mental evolution as a whole4 ,it has been remarked 7,i am told by ,coleridge1 though ,i have been unable to find the passage7 that with the advance of language1 words which were originally alike in their meanings acquire unlike meanings--a change which he expresses by the formidable word 8desynonymization40 ,among indigenous words this loss of equivalence cannot be clearly shown2 because in them the divergencies of meaning began before the dawn of literature4 ,but among words that have been coined1 or adopted from other languages1 since the writing of books commenced1 it is demonstrable4 ,in the old divines1 miscreant is used in its etymological sense of unbeliever2 but in modern speech it has entirely lost this sense4 ,similarly with evil-doer and malefactor3 exactly synonymous as these are by derivation1 they are no longer synonymous by usage3 by a malefactor we now understand a convicted criminal1 which is far from being the acceptation of evil-doer4 ,the verb produce1 bears in ,euclid its primary meaning--to prolong1 or draw out2 but the now largely developed meanings of produce have little in common with the meanings of prolong1 or draw out4 ,in the ,church of ,england liturgy1 an odd effect results from the occurrence of prevent in its original sense--to come before1 instead of its modern specialized sense--to come before with the effect of arresting4 ,but the most conclusive cases are those in which the contrasted words consist of the same parts differently combined2 as in go under and undergo4 ,we go under a tree1 and we undergo a pain4 ,but though1 if analytically considered1 the meanings of these expressions would be the same were the words transposed1 habit has so far modified their meanings that we could not without absurdity speak of undergoing a tree and going under a pain4 ,countless such instances might be brought to show that between two words which are originally of like force1 an equilibrium cannot be maintained4 ,unless they are daily used in exactly equal degrees1 in exactly similar relations 7against which there are infinite probabilities71 there necessarily arises a habit of associating one rather than the other with particular acts1 or objects4 ,such a habit1 once commenced1 becomes confirmed2 and gradually their homogeneity of meaning disappears4 ,in each individual we may see the tendency which inevitably leads to this result4 ,a certain vocabulary and a certain set of phrases1 distinguish the speech of each person3 each person habitually uses certain words in places where other words are habitually used by other persons2 and there is a continual recurrence of favourite expressions4 ,this inability to maintain a balance in the use of verbal symbols1 which characterizes every man1 characterizes1 by consequence1 aggregates of men2 and the desynonymization of words is the ultimate effect4 ,should any difficulty be felt in understanding how these mental changes exemplify a law of physical transformations that are wrought by physical forces1 it will disappear on contemplating acts of mind as nervous functions4 ,it will be seen that each loss of equilibrium above instanced1 is a loss of functional equality between some two elements of the nervous system4 ,and it will be seen that1 as in other cases1 this loss of functional equality is due to differences in the incidence of forces4 99 99 99 99 99 #aad4 ,masses of men1 in common with all other masses1 show a like proclivity similarly caused4 ,small combinations and large societies equally manifest it2 and in the one1 as in the other1 both governmental and industrial differentiations are initiated by it4 ,let us glance at the facts under these two heads4 ,a business partnership1 balanced as the authorities of its members may theoretically be1 practically becomes a union in which the authority of one partner is tacitly recognized as greater than that of the other or others4 ,though the shareholders have given equal powers to the directors of their company1 inequalities of power soon arise among them2 and usually the supremacy of some one director grows so marked1 that his decisions determine the course which the board takes4 ,nor in associations for political1 charitable1 literary1 or other purposes1 do we fail to find a like process of division into dominant and subordinate parties2 each having its leader1 its members of less influence1 and its mass of uninfluential members4 ,these minor instances in which unorganized groups of men1 standing in homogeneous relations1 may be watched gradually passing into organized groups of men standing in heterogeneous relations1 give us the key to social inequalities4 ,barbarous and civilized communities are alike characterized by separation into classes1 as well as by separation of each class into more important and less important units2 and this structure is manifestly the gradually-consolidated result of a process like that daily exemplified in trading and other combinations4 ,so long as men are constituted to act on one another1 either by physical force or by force of character1 the struggles for supremacy must finally be decided in favour of some one2 and the difference once commenced must tend to become ever more marked4 ,its unstable equilibrium being destroyed1 the uniform must gravitate with increasing rapidity into the multiform4 ,and so supremacy and subordination must establish themselves1 as we see they do1 throughout the whole structure of a society1 from the great class-divisions pervading its entire body1 down to village cliques1 and even down to every posse of school-boys4 ,probably it will be objected that such changes result1 not from the homogeneity of the original aggregations1 but from their non-homogeneity--from certain slight differences existing among their units at the outset4 ,this is doubtless the proximate cause4 ,in strictness1 such changes must be regarded as transformations of the relatively homogeneous into the relatively heterogeneous4 ,but it is abundantly clear that an aggregation of men1 absolutely alike in their endowments1 would eventually undergo a similar transformation4 ,for in the absence of perfect uniformity in the lives severally led by them--in their occupations1 physical conditions1 domestic relations1 and trains of thought and feeling--there must arise differences among them2 and these must finally initiate social differentiations4 ,even inequalities of health caused by accidents1 must1 by entailing inequalities of physical and mental power1 disturb the exact balance of mutual influences among the units2 and the balance once disturbed1 must inevitably be lost4 ,whence1 indeed1 besides seeing that a body of men absolutely homogeneous in their governmental relations1 must1 like all other homogeneous bodies1 become heterogeneous1 we also see that it must do this from the same ultimate cause--unequal exposure of its parts to incident forces4 ,the first industrial divisions of societies are much more obviously due to unlikenesses of external circumstances4 ,such divisions are absent until such unlikenesses are established4 ,nomadic tribes do not permanently expose any groups of their members to special local conditions2 nor does a stationary tribe1 when occupying only a small area1 maintain from generation to generation marked contrasts in the local conditions of its members2 and in such tribes there are no decided economical differentiations4 ,but a community which1 growing populous1 has overspread a large tract1 and has become so far settled that its members live and die in their respective districts1 keeps its several sections in different physical circumstances2 and then they no longer remain alike in their occupations4 ,those who live dispersed continue to hunt or cultivate the earth2 those who spread to the sea-shore fall into maritime occupations2 while the inhabitants of some spot chosen1 perhaps for its centrality1 as one of periodical assemblage1 become traders1 and a town springs up4 ,each of these classes undergoes a modification of character consequent on its function1 and better fitting it to its function4 ,later in the process of social evolution these local adaptations are greatly multiplied4 ,a result of differences in soil and climate1 is that the rural inhabitants in different parts of the kingdom have their occupations partially specialized2 and become respectively distinguished as chiefly producing cattle1 or sheep1 or wheat1 or oats1 or hops1 or cyder4 ,people living where coal-fields are discovered are transformed into colliers2 ,cornishmen take to mining because ,cornwall is metalliferous2 and the iron-manufacture is the dominant industry where ironstone is plentiful4 ,liverpool has assumed the office of importing cotton1 in consequence of its proximity to the district where cotton goods are made2 and for analogous reasons1 ,hull has become the chief port at which foreign wools are brought in4 ,even in the establishment of breweries1 of dye-works1 of slate-quarries1 of brickyards1 we may see the same truth4 ,so that both in general and in detail1 the specializations of the social organism which characterize separate districts1 primarily depend on local circumstances4 ,those divisions of labour which under another aspect were interpreted as due to the setting up of motion in the directions of least resistance 7 #ia71 are here interpreted as due to differences in the incident forces2 and the two interpretations are quite consistent with each other4 ,for that which in each case determines the direction of least resistance1 is the distribution of the forces to be overcome2 and hence unlikenesses of distribution in separate localities1 entails unlikenesses in the course of human action in those localities--entails industrial differentiations4 99 99 99 99 99 #aae4 ,in common with the general truths set forth in preceding chapters1 the instability of the homogeneous is demonstrable priori4 ,it1 like each of them1 is a corollary from the persistence of force4 ,already this has been tacitly implied by assigning unlikeness in the exposure of its part to surrounding agencies1 as the reason why a uniform mass loses its uniformity4 ,but here it will be proper to expand this tacit implication into definite proof4 ,on striking a mass of matter with such force as either to indent it or make it fly to pieces1 we see both that the blow affects differently its different parts1 and that the differences are consequent on the unlike relations of its parts to the force impressed4 ,the part with which the striking body comes in contact1 receiving the whole of the communicated momentum1 is driven in towards the centre of the mass4 ,it thus compresses and tends to displace the more centrally situated portions of the mass4 ,these1 however1 cannot be compressed or thrust out of their places without pressing on all surrounding portions4 ,and when the blow is violent enough to fracture the mass1 we see1 in the radial dispersion of its fragments1 that the original momentum1 in being distributed throughout it1 has been divided into numerous minor momenta1 unlike in their directions4 ,we see that these directions are determined by the positions of the parts with respect to each other1 and with respect to the point of impact4 ,we see that the parts are differently affected by the disruptive force1 because they are differently related to it in their directions and attachments--that the effects being the joint products of the cause and the conditions1 cannot be alike in parts which are differently conditioned4 ,a body on which radiant heat is falling1 exemplifies this truth still more clearly4 ,taking the simplest case 7that of a sphere7 we see that while the part nearest to the radiating centre receives the rays at right angles1 the rays strike the other parts of the exposed side at all angles from #ij down to #j4 ,again1 the molecular vibrations propagated through the mass from the surface which receives the heat1 must proceed inwards at angles differing for each point4 ,further1 the interior parts of the sphere affected by the vibrations proceeding from all points of the heated side1 must be dissimilarly affected in proportion as their positions are dissimilar4 ,so that whether they be on the recipient area1 in the middle1 or at the remote side1 the constituent atoms are all thrown into states of vibration more or less unlike each other4 ,but now1 what is the ultimate meaning of the conclusion that a uniform force produces different changes throughout a uniform mass1 because the parts of the mass stand in different relations to the force8 ,fully to understand this1 we must contemplate each part as simultaneously subject to other forces--those of gravitation1 of cohesion1 of molecular motion1 c4 ,the effect wrought by an additional force1 must be a resultant of it and the forces already in action4 ,if the forces already in action on two parts of any aggregate1 are different in their directions1 the effects produced on these two parts by like forces must be different in their directions4 ,why must they be different8 ,they must be different because such unlikeness as exists between the two sets of factors1 is made by the presence in the one of some specially-directed force that is not present in the other2 and that this force will produce an effect1 rendering the total result in the one case unlike that in the other1 is a necessary corollary from the persistence of force4 ,still more manifest does it become that the dissimilarly-placed parts of any aggregate must be dissimilarly modified by an incident force1 when we remember that the quantities of the incident force to which they are severally subject1 are not equal1 as above supposed2 but are nearly always very unequal4 ,the outer parts of masses are usually alone exposed to chemical actions2 and not only are their inner parts shielded from the affinities of external elements1 but such affinities are brought to bear unequally on their surfaces2 since chemical action sets up currents through the medium in which it takes place1 and so brings to the various parts of the surface unequal quantities of the active agent4 ,again1 the amounts of any external radiant force which the different parts of an aggregate receive1 are widely contrasted3 we have the contrast between the quantity falling on the side next the radiating centre1 and the quantity1 or rather no quantity1 falling on the opposite side2 we have contrasts in the quantities received by differently-placed areas on the exposed side2 and we have endless contrasts between the quantities received by the various parts of the interior4 ,similarly when mechanical force is expended on any aggregate1 either by collision1 continued pressure1 or tension1 the amounts of strain distributed throughout the mass are manifestly unlike for unlike positions4 ,but to say the different parts of an aggregate receive different quantities of any incident force1 is to say that their states are modified by it in different degrees--is to say that if they were before homogeneous in their relations they must be rendered to a proportionate extent heterogeneous2 since1 force being persistent1 the different quantities of it falling on the different parts1 must work in them different quantities of effect--different changes4 ,yet one more kindred deduction is required to complete the argument4 ,we may1 by parallel reasoning1 reach the conclusion that1 even apart from the action of any external force1 the equilibrium of a homogeneous aggregate must be destroyed by the unequal actions of its parts on each other4 ,that mutual influence which produces aggregation 7not to mention other mutual influences7 must work different effects on the different parts2 since they are severally exposed to it in unlike amounts and directions4 ,this will be clearly seen on remembering that the portions of which the whole is made up1 may be severally regarded as minor wholes2 that on each of these minor wholes1 the action of the entire aggregate then becomes an external incident force2 that such external incident force must1 as above shown1 work unlike changes in the parts of any such minor whole2 and that if the minor wholes are severally thus rendered heterogeneous1 the entire aggregate is rendered heterogeneous4 ,the instability of the homogeneous is thus deducible from that primordial truth which underlies our intelligence4 ,one stable homogeneity only1 is hypothetically possible4 ,if centres of force1 absolutely uniform in their powers1 were diffused with absolute uniformity through unlimited space1 they would remain in equilibrium4 ,this however1 though a verbally intelligible supposition1 is one that cannot be represented in thought2 since unlimited space is inconceivable4 ,but all finite forms of the homogeneous--all forms of it which we can know or conceive1 must inevitably lapse into heterogeneity4 ,in three several ways does the persistence of force necessitate this4 ,setting external agencies aside1 each unit of a homogeneous whole must be differently affected from any of the rest by the aggregate action of the rest upon it4 ,the resultant force exercised by the aggregate on each unit1 being in no two cases alike in both amount and direction1 and usually not in either1 any incident force1 even if uniform in amount and direction1 cannot produce like effects on the units4 ,and the various positions of the parts in relation to any incident force1 preventing them from receiving it in uniform amounts and directions1 a further difference in the effects wrought on them is inevitably produced4 ,one further remark is needed4 ,to the conclusion that the changes with which ,evolution commences1 are thus necessitated1 remains to be added the conclusion that these changes must continue4 ,the absolutely homogeneous must lose its equilibrium2 and the relatively homogeneous must lapse into the relatively less homogeneous4 ,that which is true of any total mass1 is true of the parts into which it segregates4 ,the uniformity of each such part must as inevitably be lost in multiformity1 as was that of the original whole2 and for like reasons4 ,and thus the continued changes which characterize ,evolution1 in so far as they are constituted by the lapse of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous1 and of the less heterogeneous into the more heterogeneous1 are necessary consequences of the persistence of force4 ----- ,footnote #af3 ,the idea developed in this chapter originally formed part of an article on 8,transcendental ,physiology10 published in #aheg4 ,see ,essays1 pp4 #bgi-bij4 ,,chapter ,,xiv4 ,,the ,,multiplication ,,of ,,effects4 #aaf4 ,to the cause of increasing complexity set forth in the last chapter1 we have in this chapter to add another4 ,though secondary in order of time1 it is scarcely secondary in order of importance4 ,even in the absence of the cause already assigned1 it would necessitate a change from the homogeneous to the heterogeneous2 and joined with it1 it makes this change both more rapid and more involved4 ,to come in sight of it1 we have but to pursue a step further1 that conflict between force and matter already delineated4 ,let us do this4 ,when a uniform aggregate is subject to a uniform force1 we have seen that its constituents1 being differently conditioned1 are differently modified4 ,but while we have contemplated the various parts of the aggregate as thus undergoing unlike changes1 we have not yet contemplated the unlike changes simultaneously produced on the various parts of the incident force4 ,these must be as numerous and important as the others4 ,action and re-action being equal and opposite1 it follows that in differentiating the parts on which it falls in unlike ways1 the incident force must itself be correspondingly differentiated4 ,instead of being as before1 a uniform force1 it must thereafter be a multiform force--a group of dissimilar forces4 ,a few illustrations will make this truth manifest4 ,a single force is divided by conflict with matter into forces that widely diverge4 ,in the case lately cited1 of a body shattered by violent collision1 besides the change of the homogeneous mass into a heterogeneous group of scattered fragments1 there is a change of the homogeneous momentum into a group of momenta1 heterogeneous in both amounts and directions4 ,similarly with the forces we know as light and heat4 ,after the dispersion of these by a radiating body towards all points1 they are re-dispersed towards all points by the bodies on which they fall4 ,of the ,sun's rays1 issuing from him on every side1 some few strike the ,moon4 ,these being reflected at all angles from the ,moon's surface1 some few of them strike the ,earth4 ,by a like process the few which reach the ,earth are again diffused through surrounding space4 ,and on each occasion1 such portions of the rays as are absorbed instead of reflected1 undergo refractions that equally destroy their parallelism4 ,more than this is true4 ,by conflict with matter1 a uniform force is in part changed into forces differing in their directions2 and in part it is changed into forces differing in their kinds4 ,when one body is struck against another1 that which we usually regard as the effect1 is a change of position or motion in one or both bodies4 ,but a moment's thought shows that this is a very incomplete view of the matter4 ,besides the visible mechanical result1 sound is produced2 or1 to speak accurately1 a vibration in one or both bodies1 and in the surrounding air3 and under some circumstances we call this the effect4 ,moreover1 the air has not simply been made to vibrate1 but has had currents raised in it by the transit of the bodies4 ,further1 if there is not that great structural change which we call fracture1 there is a disarrangement of the particles of the two bodies around their point of collision2 amounting in some cases to a visible condensation4 ,yet more1 this condensation is accompanied by disengagement of heat4 ,in some cases a spark--that is1 light--results1 from the incandescence of a portion struck off2 and occasionally this incandescence is associated with chemical combination4 ,thus1 by the original mechanical force expended in the collision1 at least five1 and often more1 different kinds of forces have been produced4 ,take1 again1 the lighting of a candle4 ,primarily1 this is a chemical change consequent on a rise of temperature4 ,the process of combination having once been set going by extraneous heat1 there is a continued formation of carbonic acid1 water1 c4--in itself a result more complex than the extraneous heat that first caused it4 ,but along with this process of combination there is a production of heat2 there is a production of light2 there is an ascending column of hot gases generated2 there are currents established in the surrounding air4 ,nor does the decomposition of one force into many forces end here4 ,each of the several changes worked becomes the parent of further changes4 ,the carbonic acid formed1 will by and by combine with some base2 or under the influence of sunshine give up its carbon to the leaf of a plant4 ,the water will modify the hygrometric state of the air around2 or1 if the current of hot gases containing it come against a cold body1 will be condensed3 altering the temperature1 and perhaps the chemical state1 of the surface it covers4 ,the heat given out melts the subjacent tallow1 and expands whatever it warms4 ,the light1 falling on various substances1 calls forth from them reactions by which it is modified2 and so divers colours are produced4 ,similarly even with these secondary actions1 which may be traced out into ever-multiplying ramifications1 until they become too minute to be appreciated4 ,universally1 then1 the effect is more complex than the cause4 ,whether the aggregate on which it falls be homogeneous or otherwise1 an incident force is transformed by the conflict into a number of forces that differ in their amounts1 or directions1 or kinds2 or in all these respects4 ,and of this group of variously-modified forces1 each ultimately undergoes a like transformation4 ,let us now mark how the process of evolution is furthered by this multiplication of effects4 ,an incident force decomposed by the reactions of a body into a group of unlike forces--a uniform force thus reduced to a multiform force--becomes the cause of a secondary increase of multiformity in the body which decomposes it4 ,in the last chapter we saw that the several parts of an aggregate are differently modified by any incident force4 ,it has just been shown that by the reactions of the differently modified parts1 the incident force itself must be divided into differently modified parts4 ,here it remains to point out that each differentiated division of the aggregate1 thus becomes a centre from which a differentiated division of the original force is again diffused4 ,and since unlike forces must produce unlike results1 each of these differentiated forces must produce1 throughout the aggregate1 a further series of differentiations4 ,this secondary cause of the change from homogeneity to heterogeneity1 obviously becomes more potent in proportion as the heterogeneity increases4 ,when the parts into which any evolving whole has segregated itself1 have diverged widely in nature1 they will necessarily react very diversely on any incident force--they will divide an incident force into so many strongly contrasted groups of forces4 ,and each of them becoming the centre of a quite distinct set of influences1 must add to the number of distinct secondary changes wrought throughout the aggregate4 ,yet another corollary must be added4 ,the number of unlike parts of which an aggregate consists1 as well as the degree of their unlikeness1 is an important factor in the process4 ,every additional specialized division is an additional centre of specialized forces4 ,if a uniform whole1 in being itself made multiform by an incident force1 makes the incident force multiform2 if a whole consisting of two unlike sections1 divides an incident force into two unlike groups of multiform forces2 it is clear that each new unlike section must be a further source of complication among the forces at work throughout the mass--a further source of heterogeneity4 ,the multiplication of effects must proceed in geometrical progression4 ,each stage of evolution must initiate a higher stage4 99 99 99 99 99 #aag4 ,the force of aggregation acting on irregular masses of rare matter1 diffused through a resisting medium1 will not cause such masses to move in straight lines to their common centre of gravity2 but1 as before said1 each will take a curvilinear path1 directed to one or other side of the centre of gravity4 ,all of them being differently conditioned1 gravitation will impress on each a motion differing in direction1 in velocity1 and in the degree of its curvature--uniform aggregative force will be differentiated into multiform momenta4 ,the process thus commenced1 must go on till it produces a single mass of nebulous matter2 and these independent curvilinear motions must result in a movement of this mass round its axis3 a simultaneous condensation and rotation in which we see how two effects of the aggregative force1 at first but slightly divergent1 become at last widely differentiated4 ,a gradual increase of oblateness in this revolving spheroid1 must take place through the joint action of these two forces1 as the bulk diminishes and the rotation grows more rapid2 and this we may set down as a third effect4 ,the genesis of heat1 which must accompany augmentation of density1 is a consequence of yet another order--a consequence by no means simple2 since the various parts of the mass1 being variously condensed1 must be variously heated4 ,acting throughout a gaseous spheroid1 of which the parts are unlike in their temperatures1 the forces of aggregation and rotation must work a further series of changes3 they must set up circulating currents1 both general and local4 ,at a later stage light as well as heat will be generated4 ,thus without dwelling on the likelihood of chemical combinations and electric disturbances1 it is sufficiently manifest that1 supposing matter to have originally existed in a diffused state1 the once uniform force which caused its aggregation1 must have become gradually divided into different forces2 and that each further stage of complication in the resulting aggregate1 must have initiated further subdivisions of this force--a further multiplication of effects1 increasing the previous heterogeneity4 ,this section of the argument may however be adequately sustained1 without having recourse to any such hypothetical illustrations as the foregoing4 ,the astronomical attributes of the ,earth1 will even alone suffice our purpose4 ,consider first the effects of its momentum round its axis4 ,there is the oblateness of its form2 there is the alternation of day and night2 there are certain constant marine currents2 and there are certain constant arial currents4 ,consider next the secondary series of consequences due to the divergence of the ,earth's plane of rotation from the plane of its orbit4 ,the many differences of the seasons1 both simultaneous and successive1 which pervade its surface1 are thus caused4 ,external attraction acting on this rotating oblate spheroid with inclined axis1 produces the motion called nutation1 and that slower and larger one from which follows the precession of the equinoxes1 with its several sequences4 ,and then by this same force are generated the tides1 aqueous and atmospheric4 ,perhaps1 however1 the simplest way of showing the multiplication of effects among phenomena of this order1 will be to set down the influences of any member of the ,solar ,system on the rest4 ,a planet directly produces in neighbouring planets certain appreciable perturbations1 complicating those otherwise produced in them2 and in the remoter planets it directly produces certain less visible perturbations4 ,here is a first series of effects4 ,but each of the perturbed planets is itself a source of perturbations--each directly affects all the others4 ,hence1 planet ,a having drawn planet ,b out of the position it would have occupied in ,a's absence1 the perturbations which ,b causes are different from what they would else have been2 and similarly with ,c1 ,d1 ,e1 c4 ,here then is a secondary series of effects3 far more numerous though far smaller in their amounts4 ,as these indirect perturbations must to some extent modify the movements of each planet1 there results from them a tertiary series2 and so on continually4 ,thus the force exercised by any planet works a different effect on each of the rest2 this different effect is from each as a centre partially broken up into minor different effects on the rest2 and so on in ever multiplying and diminishing waves throughout the entire system4 99 99 99 99 99 #aah4 ,if the ,earth was formed by the concentration of diffused matter1 it must at first have been incandescent2 and whether the nebular hypothesis be accepted or not1 this original incandescence of the ,earth must now be regarded as inductively established--or1 if not established1 at least rendered so probable that it is a generally admitted geological doctrine4 ,several results of the gradual cooling of the ,earth--as the formation of a crust1 the solidification of sublimed elements1 the precipitation of water1 c41 have been already noticed--and ,i here again refer to them merely to point out that they are simultaneous effects of the one cause1 diminishing heat4 ,let us now1 however1 observe the multiplied changes afterwards arising from the continuance of this one cause4 ,the ,earth1 falling in temperature1 must contract4 ,hence the solid crust at any time existing1 is presently too large for the shrinking nucleus2 and being unable to support itself1 inevitably follows the nucleus4 ,but a spheroidal envelope cannot sink down into contact with a smaller internal spheroid1 without disruption3 it will run into wrinkles1 as the rind of an apple does when the bulk of its interior decreases from evaporation4 ,as the cooling progresses and the envelope thickens1 the ridges consequent on these contractions must become greater2 rising ultimately into hills and mountains2 and the later systems of mountains thus produced must not only be higher1 as we find them to be1 but they must be longer1 as we also find them to be4 ,thus1 leaving out of view other modifying forces1 we see what immense heterogeneity of surface arises from the one cause1 loss of heat--a heterogeneity which the telescope shows us to be paralleled on the ,moon1 where aqueous and atmospheric agencies have been absent4 ,but we have yet to notice another kind of heterogeneity of surface1 similarly and simultaneously caused4 ,while the ,earth's crust was still thin1 the ridges produced by its contraction must not only have been small1 but the tracts between them must have rested with comparative smoothness on the subjacent liquid spheroid2 and the water in those arctic and antarctic regions where it first condensed1 must have been evenly distributed4 ,but as fast as the crust grew thicker and gained corresponding strength1 the lines of fracture from time to time caused in it1 necessarily occurred at greater distances apart2 the intermediate surfaces followed the contracting nucleus with less uniformity2 and there consequently resulted larger areas of land and water4 ,if any one1 after wrapping an orange in wet tissue paper1 and observing both how small are the wrinkles and how evenly the intervening spaces lie on the surface of the orange1 will then wrap it in thick cartridge-paper1 and note both the greater height of the ridges and the larger spaces throughout which the paper does not touch the orange1 he will realize the fact1 that as the ,earth's solid envelope thickened1 the areas of elevation and depression became greater4 ,in place of islands more or less homogeneously scattered over an all-embracing sea1 there must have gradually arisen heterogeneous arrangements of continent and ocean1 such as we now know4 ,this double change in the extent and in the elevation of the lands1 involved yet another species of heterogeneity--that of coast-line4 ,a tolerably even surface raised out of the ocean will have a simple1 regular sea-margin2 but a surface varied by table-lands and intersected by mountain-chains1 will1 when raised out of the ocean1 have an outline extremely irregular1 alike in its leading features and in its details4 ,thus endless is the accumulation of geological and geographical results slowly brought about by this one cause--the escape of the ,earth's primitive heat4 ,when we pass from the agency which geologists term igneous1 to aqueous and atmospheric agencies1 we see a like ever-growing complication of effects4 ,the denuding actions of air and water have1 from the beginning1 been modifying every exposed surface3 everywhere working many different changes4 ,as already shown 7 #hj7 the original source of those gaseous and fluid motions which effect denudation1 is the solar heat4 ,the transformation of this into various modes of force1 according to the nature and condition of the matter on which it falls1 is the first stage of complication4 ,the sun's rays1 striking at all angles a sphere1 that from moment to moment presents and withdraws different parts of its surface1 and each of them for a different time daily throughout the year1 would produce a considerable variety of changes even were the sphere uniform4 ,but falling as they do on a sphere surrounded by an atmosphere in some parts of which wide areas of cloud are suspended1 and which here unveils vast tracts of sea1 there of level land1 there of mountains1 there of snow and ice1 they initiate in its several parts countless different movements4 ,currents of air of all sizes1 directions1 velocities1 and temperatures1 are set up2 as are also marine currents similarly contrasted in their characters4 ,in this region the surface is giving off water in the state of vapour2 in that1 dew is being precipitated2 and in the other rain is descending--differences that arise from the ever-changing ratio between the absorption and radiation of heat in each place4 ,at one hour1 a rapid fall in temperature leads to the formation of ice1 with an accompanying expansion throughout the moist bodies frozen2 while at another1 a thaw unlocks the dislocated fragments of these bodies4 ,and then1 passing to a second stage of complication1 we see that the many kinds of motion directly or indirectly caused by the sun's rays1 severally produce results that vary with the conditions4 ,oxidation1 drought1 wind1 frost1 rain1 glaciers1 rivers1 waves1 and other denuding agents effect disintegrations that are determined in their amounts and qualities by local circumstances4 ,acting upon a tract of granite1 such agents here work scarcely an appreciable effect2 there cause exfoliations of the surface1 and a resulting heap of dbris and boulders2 and elsewhere1 after decomposing the feldspar into a white clay1 carry away this with the accompanying quartz and mica1 and deposit them in separate beds1 fluviatile and marine4 ,when the exposed land consists of several unlike formations1 sedimentary and igneous1 changes proportionably more heterogeneous are wrought4 ,the formations being disintegrable in different degrees1 there follows an increased irregularity of surface4 ,the areas drained by different rivers being differently constituted1 these rivers carry down to the sea unlike combinations of ingredients2 and so sundry new strata of distinct composition arise4 ,and here indeed we may see very simply illustrated1 the truth1 that the heterogeneity of the effects increases in a geometrical progression1 with the heterogeneity of the object acted upon4 ,a continent of complex structure1 presenting many strata irregularly distributed1 raised to various levels1 tilted up at all angles1 must1 under the same denuding agencies1 give origin to immensely multiplied results3 each district must be peculiarly modified2 each river must carry down a distinct kind of detritus2 each deposit must be differently distributed by the entangled currents1 tidal and other1 which wash the contorted shores2 and every additional complication of surface must be the cause of more than one additional consequence4 ,but not to dwell on these1 let us1 for the fuller elucidation of this truth in relation to the inorganic world1 consider what would presently follow from some extensive cosmical revolution--say the subsidence of ,central ,america4 ,the immediate results of the disturbance would themselves be sufficiently complex4 ,besides the numberless dislocations of strata1 the ejections of igneous matter1 the propagation of earthquake vibrations thousands of miles around1 the loud explosions1 and the escape of gases1 there would be the rush of the ,atlantic and ,pacific ,oceans to supply the vacant space1 the subsequent recoil of enormous waves1 which would traverse both these oceans and produce myriads of changes along their shores1 the corresponding atmospheric waves complicated by the currents surrounding each volcanic vent1 and the electrical discharges with which such disturbances are accompanied4 ,but these temporary effects would be insignificant compared with the permanent ones4 ,the complex currents of the ,atlantic and ,pacific would be altered in directions and amounts4 ,the distribution of heat achieved by these currents would be different from what it is4 ,the arrangement of the isothermal lines1 not only on the neighbouring continents1 but even throughout ,europe1 would be changed4 ,the tides would flow differently from what they do now4 ,there would be more or less modification of the winds in their periods1 strengths1 directions1 qualities4 ,rain would fall scarcely anywhere at the same times and in the same quantities as at present4 ,in short1 the meteorological conditions thousands of miles off1 on all sides1 would be more or less revolutionized4 ,in these many changes1 each of which comprehends countless minor ones1 the reader will see the immense heterogeneity of the results wrought out by one force1 when that force expends itself on a previously complicated area2 and he will readily draw the corollary that from the beginning the complication has advanced at an increasing rate4 99 99 99 99 99 #aai4 ,we have next to trace throughout organic evolution1 this same all-pervading principle4 ,and here1 where the transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous was first observed1 the production of many changes by one cause is least easy to demonstrate4 ,the development of a seed into a plant1 or an ovum into an animal1 is so gradual2 while the forces which determine it are so involved1 and at the same time so unobtrusive2 that it is difficult to detect the multiplication of effects which is elsewhere so obvious4 ,nevertheless1 by indirect evidence we may establish our proposition2 spite of the lack of direct evidence4 ,observe1 first1 how numerous are the changes which any marked stimulus works on an adult organism--a human being1 for instance4 ,an alarming sound or sight1 besides impressions on the organs of sense and the nerves1 may produce a start1 a scream1 a distortion of the face1 a trembling consequent on general muscular relaxation1 a burst of perspiration1 an excited action of the heart1 a rush of blood to the brain1 followed possibly by arrest of the heart's action and by syncope2 and if the system be feeble1 an illness with its long train of complicated symptoms may set in4 ,similarly in cases of disease4 ,a minute portion of the small-pox virus introduced into the system1 will1 in a severe case1 cause1 during the first stage1 rigors1 heat of skin1 accelerated pulse1 furred tongue1 loss of appetite1 thirst1 epigastric uneasiness1 vomiting1 headache1 pains in the back and limbs1 muscular weakness1 convulsions1 delirium1 c42 in the second stage1 cutaneous eruption1 itching1 tingling1 sore throat1 swelled fauces1 salivation1 cough1 hoarseness1 dyspna1 c42 and in the third stage1 dematous inflammations1 pneumonia1 pleurisy1 diarrha1 inflammation of the brain1 ophthalmia1 erysipelas1 c43 each of which enumerated symptoms is itself more or less complex4 ,medicines1 special foods1 better air1 might in like manner be instanced as producing multiplied results4 ,now it needs only to consider that the many changes thus wrought by one force on an adult organism1 must be partially paralleled in an embryo-organism1 to understand how here also the production of many effects by one cause is a source of increasing heterogeneity4 ,the external heat and other agencies which determine the first complications of the germ1 will1 by acting on these1 superinduce further complications2 on these still higher and more numerous ones2 and so on continually3 each organ as it is developed1 serving1 by its actions and reactions on the rest1 to initiate new complexities4 ,the first pulsations of the ftal heart must simultaneously aid the unfolding of every part4 ,the growth of each tissue1 by taking from the blood special proportions of elements1 must modify the constitution of the blood2 and so must modify the nutrition of all the other tissues4 ,the distributive actions1 implying as they do a certain waste1 necessitate an addition to the blood of effete matters1 which must influence the rest of the system1 and perhaps1 as some think1 initiate the formation of excretory organs4 ,the nervous connections established among the viscera must further multiply their mutual influences4 ,and so with every modification of structure--every additional part and every alteration in the ratios of parts4 ,still stronger becomes the proof when we call to mind the fact1 that the same germ may be evolved into different forms according to circumstances4 ,thus1 during its earlier stages1 every embryo is sexless--becomes either male or female as the balance of forces acting on it determines4 ,again1 it is well-known that the larva of a working-bee will develop into a queen-bee1 if1 before a certain period1 its food be changed to that on which the larv of queen-bees are fed4 ,even more remarkable is the case of certain entozoa4 ,the ovum of a tape-worm1 getting into the intestine of one animal1 unfolds into the form of its parent2 but if carried into other parts of the system1 or into the intestine of some unlike animal1 it becomes one of the sac-like creatures1 called by naturalists ,cysticerci1 or ,cnuri1 or ,echinococci--creatures so extremely different from the tape-worm in aspect and structure1 that only after careful investigations have they been proved to have the same origin4 ,all which instances imply that each advance in embryonic complication results from the action of incident forces on the complication previously existing4 ,indeed1 the now accepted doctrine of epigenesis necessitates the conclusion that organic evolution proceeds after this manner4 ,for since it is proved that no germ1 animal or vegetal1 contains the slightest rudiment1 trace1 or indication of the future organism--since the microscope has shown us that the first process set up in every fertilized germ is a process of repeated spontaneous fissions1 ending in the production of a mass of cells1 not one of which exhibits any special character2 there seems no alternative but to conclude that the partial organization at any moment subsisting in a growing embryo1 is transformed by the agencies acting on it into the succeeding phase of organization1 and this into the next1 until1 through ever-increasing complexities1 the ultimate form is reached4 ,thus1 though the subtlety of the forces and the slowness of the metamorphosis1 prevent us from directly tracing the genesis of many changes by one cause1 throughout the successive stages which every embryo passes through2 yet1 indirectly1 we have strong evidence that this is a source of increasing heterogeneity4 ,we have marked how multitudinous are the effects which a single agency may generate in an adult organism2 that a like multiplication of effects must happen in the unfolding organism1 we have inferred from sundry illustrative cases2 further1 it has been pointed out that the ability which like germs have to originate unlike forms1 implies that the successive transformations result from the new changes superinduced on previous changes2 and we have seen that structureless as every germ originally is1 the development of an organism out of it is otherwise incomprehensible4 ,doubtless we are still in the dark respecting those mysterious properties which make the germ1 when subject to fit influences1 undergo the special changes beginning this series of transformations4 ,all here contended is1 that given a germ possessing these mysterious properties1 the evolution of an organism from it depends1 in part1 on that multiplication of effects which we have seen to be a cause of evolution in general1 so far as we have yet traced it4 ,when1 leaving the development of single plants and animals1 we pass to that of the ,earth's flora and fauna1 the course of the argument again becomes clear and simple4 ,though1 as before admitted1 the fragmentary facts ,palontology has accumulated1 do not clearly warrant us in saying that1 in the lapse of geologic time1 there have been evolved more heterogeneous organisms1 and more heterogeneous assemblages of organisms2 yet we shall now see that there must ever have been a tendency towards these results4 ,we shall find that the production of many effects by one cause1 which1 as already shown1 has been all along increasing the physical heterogeneity of the ,earth1 has further necessitated an increasing heterogeneity in its flora and fauna1 individually and collectively4 ,an illustration will make this clear4 ,suppose that by a series of upheavals1 occurring1 as they are now known to do1 at long intervals1 the ,east ,indian ,archipelago were to be raised into a continent1 and a chain of mountains formed along the axis of elevation4 ,by the first of these upheavals1 the plants and animals inhabiting ,borneo1 ,sumatra1 ,new ,guinea1 and the rest1 would be subjected to slightly-modified sets of conditions4 ,the climate in general would be altered in temperature1 in humidity1 and in its periodical variations2 while the local differences would be multiplied4 ,these modifications would affect1 perhaps inappreciably1 the entire flora and fauna of the region4 ,the change of level would produce additional modifications2 varying in different species1 and also in different members of the same species1 according to their distance from the axis of elevation4 ,plants1 growing only on the sea-shore in special localities1 might become extinct4 ,others1 living only in swamps of a certain humidity1 would1 if they survived at all1 probably undergo visible changes of appearance4 ,while more marked alterations would occur in some of the plants that spread over the lands newly raised above the sea4 ,the animals and insects living on these modified plants1 would themselves be in some degree modified by change of food1 as well as by change of climate2 and the modification would be more marked where1 from the dwindling or disappearance of one kind of plant1 an allied kind was eaten4 ,in the lapse of the many generations arising before the next upheaval1 the sensible or insensible alterations thus produced in each species1 would become organized--in all the races that survived there would be a more or less complete adaptation to the new conditions4 ,the next upheaval would superinduce further organic changes1 implying wider divergences from the primary forms2 and so repeatedly4 ,now however let it be observed that this revolution would not be a substitution of a thousand modified species for the thousand original species2 but in place of the thousand original species there would arise several thousand species1 or varieties1 or changed forms4 ,each species being distributed over an area of some extent1 and tending continually to colonize the new area exposed1 its different members would be subject to different sets of changes4 ,plants and animals migrating towards the equator would not be affected in the same way with others migrating from it4 ,those which spread towards the new shores1 would undergo changes unlike the changes undergone by those which spread into the mountains4 ,thus1 each original race of organisms would become the root from which diverged several races1 differing more or less from it and from each other2 and while some of these might subsequently disappear1 probably more than one would survive in the next geologic period3 the very dispersion itself increasing the chances of survival4 ,not only would there be certain modifications thus caused by changes of physical conditions and food2 but also in some cases other modifications caused by changes of habit4 ,the fauna of each island1 peopling1 step by step1 the newly-raised tracts1 would eventually come in contact with the faunas of other islands2 and some members of these other faunas would be unlike any creatures before seen4 ,herbivores meeting with new beasts of prey1 would1 in some cases1 be led into modes of defence or escape differing from those previously used2 and simultaneously the beasts of prey would modify their modes of pursuit and attack4 ,we know that when circumstances demand it1 such changes of habit do take place in animals2 and we know that if the new habits become the dominant ones1 they must eventually in some degree alter the organization4 ,observe now1 however1 a further consequence4 ,there must arise not simply a tendency towards the differentiation of each race of organisms into several races2 but also a tendency to the occasional production of a somewhat higher organism4 ,taken in the mass1 these divergent varieties1 which have been caused by fresh physical conditions and habits of life1 will exhibit alterations quite indefinite in kind and degree2 and alterations that do not necessarily constitute an advance4 ,probably in most cases the modified type will be not appreciably more heterogeneous than the original one4 ,but it must now and then occur1 that some division of a species1 falling into circumstances which give it rather more complex experiences1 and demand actions somewhat more involved1 will have certain of its organs further differentiated in proportionately small degrees--will become slightly more heterogeneous4 ,hence1 there will from time to time arise an increased heterogeneity both of the ,earth's flora and fauna1 and of individual races included in them4 ,omitting detailed explanations1 and allowing for the qualifications which cannot here be specified1 it is sufficiently clear that geological mutations have all along tended to complicate the forms of life1 whether regarded separately or collectively4 ,that multiplication of effects which has been a part-cause of the transformation of the ,earth's crust from the simple into the complex1 has simultaneously led to a parallel transformation of the ,life upon its surface4#ag ,the deduction here drawn from the established truths of geology and the general laws of life1 gains immensely in weight on finding it to be in harmony with an induction drawn from direct experience4 ,just that divergence of many races from one race1 which we inferred must have been continually occurring during geologic time1 we know to have occurred during the pre-historic and historic periods1 in man and domestic animals4 ,and just that multiplication of effects which we concluded must have been instrumental to the first1 we see has in a great measure wrought the last4 ,single causes1 as famine1 pressure of population1 war1 have periodically led to further dispersions of mankind and of dependent creatures3 each such dispersion initiating new modifications1 new varieties of type4 ,whether all the human races be or be not derived from one stock1 philology makes it clear that whole groups of races1 now easily distinguishable from each other1 were originally one race--that the diffusion of one race into different climates and conditions of existence has produced many altered forms of it4 ,similarly with domestic animals4 ,though in some cases 7as that of dogs7 community of origin will perhaps be disputed1 yet in other cases 7as that of the sheep or the cattle of our own country7 it will not be questioned that local differences of climate1 food1 and treatment1 have transformed one original breed into numerous breeds1 now become so far distinct as to produce unstable hybrids4 ,moreover1 through the complication of effects flowing from single causes1 we here find1 what we before inferred1 not only an increase of general heterogeneity1 but also of special heterogeneity4 ,while of the divergent divisions and subdivisions of the human race1 many have undergone changes not constituting an advance2 others have become decidedly more heterogeneous4 ,the civilized ,european departs more widely from the vertebrate archetype than does the savage4 99 99 99 99 99 #abj4 ,a sensation does not expend itself in arousing some single state of consciousness2 but the state of consciousness aroused is made up of various represented sensations connected by co-existence1 or sequence with the presented sensation4 ,and that1 in proportion as the grade of intelligence is high1 the number of ideas suggested is great1 may be readily inferred4 ,let us1 however1 look at the proof that here too1 each change is the parent of many changes2 and that the multiplication increases in proportion as the area affected is complex4 ,were some hitherto unknown bird1 driven say by stress of weather from the remote north1 to make its appearance on our shores1 it would excite no speculation in the sheep or cattle amid which it alighted3 a perception of it as a creature like those constantly flying about1 would be the sole interruption of that dull current of consciousness which accompanies grazing and rumination4 ,the cow-herd1 by whom we may suppose the exhausted bird to be presently caught1 would probably gaze at it with some slight curiosity1 as being unlike any he had before seen--would note its most conspicuous markings1 and vaguely ponder on the questions1 where it came from1 and how it came4 ,the village bird-stuffer would have suggested to him by the sight of it1 sundry forms to which it bore a little resemblance2 would receive from it more numerous and more specific impressions respecting structure and plumage2 would be reminded of various instances of birds brought by storms from foreign parts--would tell who found them1 who stuffed them1 who bought them4 ,supposing the unknown bird taken to a naturalist of the old school1 interested only in externals1 7one of those described by the late ,edward ,forbes1 as examining animals as though they were merely skins filled with straw17 it would excite in him a more involved series of mental changes3 there would be an elaborate examination of the feathers1 a noting of all their technical distinctions1 with a reduction of these perceptions to certain equivalent written symbols2 reasons for referring the new form to a particular family1 order1 and genus would be sought out and written down2 communications with the secretary of some society1 or editor of some journal1 would follow2 and probably there would be not a few thoughts about the addition of the ii to the describer's name1 to form the name of the species4 ,lastly1 in the mind of a comparative anatomist1 such a new species1 should it happen to have any marked internal peculiarity1 might produce additional sets of changes--might very possibly suggest modified views respecting the relationships of the division to which it belonged2 or1 perhaps1 alter his conceptions of the homologies and developments of certain organs2 and the conclusions drawn might not improbably enter as elements into still wider inquiries concerning the origin of organic forms4 ,from ideas let us turn to emotions4 ,in a young child1 a father's anger produces little else than vague fear--a disagreeable sense of impending evil1 taking various shapes of physical suffering or deprivation of pleasures4 ,in elder children1 the same harsh words will arouse additional feelings3 sometimes a sense of shame1 of penitence1 or of sorrow for having offended2 at other times1 a sense of injustice1 and a consequent anger4 ,in the wife1 yet a further range of feelings may come into existence--perhaps wounded affection1 perhaps self-pity for ill-usage1 perhaps contempt for groundless irritability1 perhaps sympathy for some suffering which the irritability indicates1 perhaps anxiety about an unknown misfortune which she thinks has produced it4 ,nor are we without evidence that among adults1 the like differences of development are accompanied by like differences in the number of emotions that are aroused1 in combination or rapid succession--the lower natures being characterized by that impulsiveness which results from the uncontrolled action of a few feelings2 and the higher natures being characterized by the simultaneous action of many secondary feelings1 modifying those first awakened4 ,possibly it will be objected that the illustrations here given1 are drawn from the functional changes of the nervous system1 not from its structural changes2 and that what is proved among the first1 does not necessarily hold among the last4 ,this must be admitted4 ,those1 however1 who recognize the truth that the structural changes are the slowly accumulated results of the functional changes1 will readily draw the corollary1 that a part-cause of the evolution of the nervous system1 as of other evolution1 is this multiplication of effects which becomes ever greater as the development becomes higher4 99 99 99 99 99 #aba4 ,if the advance of ,man towards greater heterogeneity in both body and mind1 is in part traceable to the production of many effects by one cause1 still more clearly may the advance of ,society towards greater heterogeneity be so explained4 ,consider the growth of an industrial organization4 ,when1 as must occasionally happen1 some individual of a tribe displays unusual aptitude for making an article of general use 7a weapon1 for instance7 which was before made by each man for himself1 there arises a tendency towards the differentiation of that individual into a maker of weapons4 ,his companions 7warriors and hunters all of them7 severally wish to have the best weapons that can be made2 and are therefore certain to offer strong inducements to this skilled individual to make weapons for them4 ,he1 on the other hand1 having both an unusual faculty1 and an unusual liking1 for making weapons 7the capacity and the desire for any occupation being commonly associated71 is predisposed to fulfil these commissions on the offer of adequate rewards3 especially as his love of distinction is also gratified4 ,this first specialization of function1 once commenced1 tends ever to become more decided4 ,on the side of the weapon-maker1 continued practice gives increased skill--increased superiority to his products4 ,on the side of his clients1 cessation of practice entails decreased skill4 ,thus the influences that determine this division of labour grow stronger in both ways3 this social movement tends ever to become more decided in the direction in which it was first set up2 and the incipient heterogeneity is1 on the average of cases1 likely to become permanent for that generation1 if no longer4 ,such a process1 besides differentiating the social mass into two parts1 the one monopolizing1 or almost monopolizing1 the performance of a certain function1 and the other having lost the habit1 and in some measure the power1 of performing that function1 has a tendency to initiate other differentiations4 ,the advance described implies the introduction of barter3 the maker of weapons has1 on each occasion1 to be paid in such other articles as he agrees to take in exchange4 ,now he will not habitually take in exchange one kind of article1 but many kinds4 ,he does not want mats only1 or skins1 or fishing-gear2 but he wants all these2 and on each occasion will bargain for the particular things he most needs4 ,what follows8 ,if among the members of the tribe there exist any slight differences of skill in the manufacture of these various things1 as there are almost sure to do1 the weapon-maker will take from each one the thing which that one excels in making3 he will exchange for mats with him whose mats are superior1 and will bargain for the fishing-gear of whoever has the best4 ,but he who has bartered away his mats or his fishing-gear1 must make other mats or fishing-gear for himself2 and in so doing must1 in some degree1 further develop his aptitude4 ,thus it results that the small specialities of faculty possessed by various members of the tribe will tend to grow more decided4 ,if such transactions are from time to time repeated1 these specializations may become appreciable4 ,and whether or not there ensue distinct differentiations of other individuals into makers of particular articles1 it is clear that incipient differentiations take place throughout the tribe3 the one original cause produces not only the first dual effect1 but a number of secondary dual effects1 like in kind but minor in degree4 ,this process1 of which traces may be seen among groups of school-boys1 cannot well produce a lasting distribution of functions in an unsettled tribe2 but where there grows up a fixed and multiplying community1 such differentiations become permanent1 and increase with each generation4 ,an addition to the number of citizens1 involving a greater demand for every commodity1 intensifies the functional activity of each specialized person or class2 and this renders the specialization more definite where it already exists1 and establishes it where it is but nascent4 ,by increasing the pressure on the means of subsistence1 a larger population again augments these results2 since every individual is forced more and more to confine himself to that which he can do best1 and by which he can gain most4 ,and this industrial progress1 by aiding future production1 opens the way for further growth of population1 which reacts as before4 ,presently1 under the same stimuli1 new occupations arise4 ,competing workers1 severally aiming to produce improved articles1 occasionally discover better processes or better materials4 ,in weapons and cutting-tools1 the substitution of bronze for stone entails on him who first makes it1 a great increase of demand--so great an increase that he presently finds all his time occupied in making the bronze for the articles he sells1 and is obliged to depute the fashioning of these articles to others2 and eventually the making of bronze1 thus gradually differentiated from a pre-existing occupation1 becomes an occupation by itself4 ,but now mark the ramified changes which follow this change4 ,bronze soon replaces stone1 not only in the articles it was first used for1 but in many others2 and so affects the manufacture of them4 ,further1 it affects the processes which such improved utensils subserve1 and the resulting products--modifies buildings1 carvings1 dress1 personal decorations4 ,yet again1 it sets going sundry manufactures which were before impossible1 from lack of a material fit for the requisite tools4 ,and all these changes react on the people--increase their manipulative skill1 their intelligence1 their comfort--refine their habits and tastes4 ,it is out of the question here to follow through its successive complications1 this increasing social heterogeneity that results from the production of many effects by one cause4 ,but leaving the intermediate phases of social development1 let us take an illustration from its passing phase4 ,to trace the effects of steam-power1 in its manifold applications to mining1 navigation1 and manufactures1 would carry us into unmanageable detail4 ,let us confine ourselves to the latest embodiment of steam-power--the locomotive engine4 ,this1 as the proximate cause of our railway-system1 has changed the face of the country1 the course of trade1 and the habits of the people4 ,consider1 first1 the complicated sets of changes that precede the making of every railway--the provisional arrangements1 the meetings1 the registration1 the trial-section1 the parliamentary survey1 the lithographed plans1 the books of reference1 the local deposits and notices1 the application to ,parliament1 the passing ,standing-,orders ,committee1 the first1 second1 and third readings3 each of which brief heads indicates a multiplicity of transactions1 and the further development of sundry occupations1 7as those of engineers1 surveyors1 lithographers1 parliamentary agents1 share-brokers17 and the creation of sundry others 7as those of traffic-takers1 reference-takers74 ,consider1 next1 the yet more marked changes implied in railway construction--the cuttings1 em-bankings1 tunnellings1 diversions of roads2 the building of bridges and stations2 the laying down of ballast1 sleepers1 and rails2 the making of engines1 tenders1 carriages1 and wagons3 which processes1 acting upon numerous trades1 increase the importation of timber1 the quarrying of stone1 the manufacture of iron1 the mining of coal1 the burning of bricks2 institute a variety of special manufactures weekly advertised in the ,railway ,times2 and call into being some new classes of workers--drivers1 stokers1 cleaners1 plate-layers1 c4 c4 ,then come the changes1 more numerous and involved still1 which railways in action produce on the community at large4 ,the organization of every business is more or less modified3 ease of communication makes it better to do directly what was before done by proxy2 agencies are established where previously they would not have paid2 goods are obtained from remote wholesale houses instead of near retail ones2 and commodities are used which distance once rendered inaccessible4 ,the rapidity and small cost of carriage1 tend to specialize more than ever the industries of different districts--to confine each manufacture to the parts in which1 from local advantages1 it can be best carried on4 ,economical distribution equalizes prices1 and also1 on the average1 lowers prices3 thus bringing divers articles within the means of those before unable to buy them1 and so increasing their comforts and improving their habits4 ,at the same time the practice of travelling is immensely extended4 ,classes who before could not afford it1 take annual trips to the sea2 visit their distant relations2 make tours2 and so we are benefited in body1 feelings1 and intellect4 ,the more prompt transmission of letters and of news produces further changes--makes the pulse of the nation faster4 ,yet more1 there arises a wide dissemination of cheap literature through railway book-stalls1 and of advertisements in railway carriages3 both of them aiding ulterior progress4 ,and the innumerable changes here briefly indicated are consequent on the invention of the locomotive engine4 ,the social organism has been rendered more heterogeneous1 in virtue of the many new occupations introduced1 and the many old ones further specialized2 prices in all places have been altered2 each trader has1 more or less1 modified his way of doing business2 and every person has been affected in his actions1 thoughts1 emotions4 ,the only further fact demanding notice1 is1 that we here see more clearly than ever1 that in proportion as the area over which any influence extends1 becomes heterogeneous1 the results are in a yet higher degree multiplied in number and kind4 ,while among the primitive tribes to whom it was first known1 caoutchouc caused but few changes1 among ourselves the changes have been so many and varied that the history of them occupies a volume4 ,upon the small1 homogeneous community inhabiting one of the ,hebrides1 the electric telegraph would produce1 were it used1 scarcely any results2 but in ,england the results it produces are multitudinous4 ,space permitting1 the synthesis might here be pursued in relation to all the subtler products of social life4 ,it might be shown how1 in ,science1 an advance of one division presently advances other divisions--how ,astronomy has been immensely forwarded by discoveries in ,optics1 while other optical discoveries have initiated ,microscopic ,anatomy1 and greatly aided the growth of ,physiology--how ,chemistry has indirectly increased our knowledge of ,electricity1 ,magnetism1 ,biology1 ,geology--how ,electricity has reacted on ,chemistry and ,magnetism1 developed our views of ,light and ,heat1 and disclosed sundry laws of nervous action4 ,in ,literature the same truth might be exhibited in the still-multiplying forms of periodical publications that have descended from the first newspaper1 and which have severally acted and reacted on other forms of literature and on each other2 or in the bias given by each book of power to various subsequent books4 ,the influence which a new school of ,painting 7as that of the pre-,raphaelites7 exercises on other schools2 the hints which all kinds of pictorial art are deriving from ,photography2 the complex results of new critical doctrines2 might severally be dwelt on as displaying the like multiplication of effects4 ,but it would needlessly tax the reader's patience to detail1 in their many ramifications1 these various changes3 here become so involved and subtle as to be followed with some difficulty4 99 99 99 99 99 #abb4 ,after the argument which closed the last chapter1 a parallel one seems here scarcely required4 ,for symmetry's sake1 however1 it will be proper briefly to point out how the multiplication of effects1 like the instability of the homogeneous1 is a corollary from the persistence of force4 ,things which we call different are things which react in different ways2 and we can know them as different only by the differences in their reactions4 ,when we distinguish bodies as hard and soft1 rough and smooth1 we simply mean that certain like muscular forces expended on them are followed by unlike sets of sensations--unlike re-active forces4 ,objects that are classed as red1 blue1 yellow1 c41 are objects that decompose light in strongly-contrasted ways2 that is1 we know contrasts of colour as contrasts in the changes produced in a uniform incident force4 ,manifestly1 any two things which do not work unequal effects on consciousness1 either by unequally opposing our own energies1 or by impressing our senses with unequally modified forms of certain external energies1 cannot be distinguished by us4 ,hence the proposition that the different parts of any whole must react differently on a uniform incident force1 and must so reduce it to a group of multiform forces1 is in essence a truism4 ,a further step will reduce this truism to its lowest terms4 ,when1 from unlikeness between the effects they produce on consciousness1 we predicate unlikeness between two objects1 what is our warrant8 and what do we mean by the unlikeness1 objectively considered8 ,our warrant is the persistence of force4 ,some kind or amount of change has been wrought in us by the one1 which has not been wrought by the other4 ,this change we ascribe to some force exercised by the one which the other has not exercised4 ,and we have no alternative but to do this1 or to assert that the change had no antecedent2 which is to deny the persistence of force4 ,whence it is further manifest that what we regard as the objective unlikeness is the presence in the one of some force1 or set of forces1 not present in the other--something in the kinds or amounts or directions of the constituent forces of the one1 which those of the other do not parallel4 ,but now if things or parts of things which we call different1 are those of which the constituent forces differ in one or more respects2 what must happen to any like forces1 or any uniform force1 falling on them8 ,such like forces1 or parts of a uniform force1 must be differently modified4 ,the force which is present in the one and not in the other1 must be an element in the conflict--must produce its equivalent reaction2 and must so affect the total reaction4 ,to say otherwise is to say that this differential force will produce no effect2 which is to say that force is not persistent4 ,i need not develop this corollary further4 ,it manifestly follows that a uniform force1 falling on a uniform aggregate1 must undergo dispersion2 that falling on an aggregate made up of unlike parts1 it must undergo dispersion from each part1 as well as qualitative differentiations2 that in proportion as the parts are unlike1 these qualitative differentiations must be marked2 that in proportion to the number of the parts1 they must be numerous2 that the secondary forces so produced1 must undergo further transformations while working equivalent transformations in the parts that change them2 and similarly with the forces they generate4 ,thus the conclusions that a part-cause of ,evolution is the multiplication of effects2 and that this increases in geometrical progression as the heterogeneity becomes greater2 are not only to be established inductively1 but are deducible from the deepest of all truths4 ----- ,footnote #ag3 ,had this paragraph1 first published in the ,westminster ,review in #aheg1 been written after the appearance of ,mr4 ,darwin's work on ,the ,origin of ,species1 it would doubtless have been otherwise expressed4 ,reference would have been made to the process of 8natural selection10 as greatly facilitating the differentiations described4 ,as it is1 however1 ,i prefer to let the passage stand in its original shape3 partly because it seems to me that these successive changes of conditions would produce divergent varieties or species1 apart from the influence of 8natural selection0 7though in less numerous ways as well as less rapidly72 and partly because ,i conceive that in the absence of these successive changes of conditions1 8natural selection0 would effect comparatively little4 ,let me add that though these positions are not enunciated in ,the ,origin of ,species1 yet a mutual friend gives me reason to think that ,mr4 ,darwin would coincide in them2 if he did not indeed consider them as tacitly implied in his work4 ,,chapter ,,xv4 ,,differentiation ,,and ,,integration4 #abc4 ,the general interpretation of ,evolution is far from being completed in the preceding chapters4 ,we must contemplate its changes under yet another aspect1 before we can form a definite conception of the process constituted by them4 ,though the laws already set forth1 furnish a key to the re-arrangement of parts which ,evolution exhibits1 in so far as it is an advance from the uniform to the multiform2 they furnish no key to this re-arrangement in so far as it is an advance from the indefinite to the definite4 ,on studying the actions and re-actions everywhere going on1 we have found it to follow inevitably from a certain primordial truth1 that the homogeneous must lapse into the heterogeneous1 and that the heterogeneous must become more heterogeneous2 but we have not discovered why the differently-affected parts of any simple whole1 become clearly marked off from each other1 at the same time that they become unlike4 ,thus far no reason has been assigned why there should not ordinarily arise a vague chaotic heterogeneity1 in place of that orderly heterogeneity displayed in ,evolution4 ,it still remains to find out the cause of that integration of parts which accompanies their differentiation--that gradually-completed segregation of like units into a group1 distinctly separated from neighbouring groups which are severally made up of other kinds of units4 ,the rationale will be conveniently introduced by a few instances in which we may watch this segregative process taking place4 ,when towards the end of ,september1 the trees are gaining their autumn colours1 and we are hoping shortly to see a further change increasing still more the beauty of the landscape1 we are not uncommonly disappointed by the occurrence of an equinoxial gale4 ,out of the mixed mass of foliage on each branch1 the strong current of air carries away the decaying and brightly-tinted leaves1 but fails to detach those which are still green4 ,and while these last1 frayed and seared by long-continued beatings against each other1 and the twigs around them1 give a sombre colour to the woods1 the red and yellow and orange leaves are collected together in ditches and behind walls and in corners where eddies allow them to settle4 ,that is to say1 by the action of that uniform force which the wind exerts on both kinds1 the dying leaves are picked out from among their still living companions and gathered in places by themselves4 ,again1 the separation of particles of different sizes1 as dust and sand from pebbles1 may be similarly effected2 as we see on every road in ,march4 ,and from the days of ,homer downwards1 the power of currents of air1 natural and artificial1 to part from one another units of unlike specific gravities1 has been habitually utilized in the winnowing of chaff from wheat4 ,in every river we see how the mixed materials carried down1 are separately deposited--how in rapids the bottom gives rest to nothing but boulders and pebbles2 how where the current is not so strong1 sand is let fall2 and how1 in still places1 there is a sediment of mud4 ,this selective action of moving water1 is commonly applied in the arts to obtain masses of particles of different degrees of fineness4 ,emery1 for example1 after being ground1 is carried by a slow current through successive compartments2 in the first of which the largest grains subside2 in the second of which the grains that reach the bottom before the water has escaped1 are somewhat smaller2 in the third smaller still2 until in the last there are deposited only those finest particles which fall so slowly through the water1 that they have not previously been able to reach the bottom4 ,and in a way that is different though equally significant1 this segregative effect of water in motion1 is exemplified in the carrying away of soluble from insoluble matters--an application of it hourly made in every laboratory4 ,the effects of the uniform forces which aerial and aqueous currents exercise1 are paralleled by those of uniform forces of other orders4 ,electric attraction will separate small bodies from large1 or light bodies from heavy4 ,by magnetism1 grains of iron may be selected from among other grains2 as by the ,sheffield grinder1 whose magnetized gauze mask filters out the steel-dust which his wheel gives off1 from the stone-dust that accompanies it4 ,and how the affinity of any agent acting differently on the components of a given body1 enables us to take away some component and leave the rest behind1 is shown in almost every chemical experiment4 ,what now is the general truth here variously presented8 ,how are these several facts and countless similar ones1 to be expressed in terms that embrace them all8 ,in each case we see in action a force which may be regarded as simple or uniform--fluid motion in a certain direction at a certain velocity2 electric or magnetic attraction of a given amount2 chemical affinity of a particular kind3 or rather1 in strictness1 the acting force is compounded of one of these and certain other uniform forces1 as gravitation1 etc4 ,in each case we have an aggregate made up of unlike units--either atoms of different substances combined or intimately mingled1 or fragments of the same substance of different sizes1 or other constituent parts that are unlike in their specific gravities1 shapes1 or other attributes4 ,and in each case these unlike units1 or groups of units1 of which the aggregate consists1 are1 under the influence of some resultant force acting indiscriminately on them all1 separated from each other--segregated into minor aggregates1 each consisting of units that are severally like each other and unlike those of the other minor aggregates4 ,such being the common aspect of these changes1 let us look for the common interpretation of them4 ,in the chapter on 8,the ,instability of the ,homogeneous10 it was shown that a uniform force falling on any aggregate1 produces unlike modifications in its different parts--turns the uniform into the multiform and the multiform into the more multiform4 ,the transformation thus wrought1 consists of either insensible or sensible changes of relative position among the units1 or of both--either of those molecular re-arrangements which we call chemical1 or of those larger transpositions which are distinguished as mechanical1 or of the two united4 ,such portion of the permanently effective force as reaches each different part1 or differently-conditioned part1 may be expended in modifying the mutual relations of its constituents2 or it may be expended in moving the part to another place2 or it may be expended partially in the first and partially in the second4 ,hence1 so much of the permanently effective force as does not work the one kind of effect1 must work the other kind4 ,it is manifest that if of the permanently effective force which falls on some compound unit of an aggregate1 little1 if any1 is absorbed in re-arranging the ultimate components of such compound unit1 much or the whole1 must show itself in motion of such compound unit to some other place in the aggregate2 and conversely1 if little or none of this force is absorbed in generating mechanical transposition1 much or the whole must go to produce molecular alterations4 ,what now must follow from this8 ,in cases where none or only part of the force generates chemical re-distributions1 what physical re-distributions must be generated8 ,parts that are similar to each other will be similarly acted on by the force2 and will similarly react on it4 ,parts that are dissimilar will be dissimilarly acted on by the force2 and will dissimilarly react on it4 ,hence the permanently effective incident force1 when wholly or partially transformed into mechanical motion of the units1 will produce like motions in units that are alike1 and unlike motions in units that are unlike4 ,if then1 in an aggregate containing two or more orders of mixed units1 those of the same order will be moved in the same way1 and in a way that differs from that in which units of other orders are moved1 the respective orders must segregate4 ,a group of like things on which are impressed motions that are alike in amount and direction1 must be transferred as a group to another place1 and if they are mingled with some group of other things1 on which the motions impressed are like each other1 but unlike those of the first group in amount or direction or both1 these other things must be transferred as a group to some other place--the mixed aggregate must undergo a simultaneous differentiation and integration4 ,in further elucidation of this process1 it will be well here to set down a few instances in which we may see that1 other things equal1 the definiteness of the separation is in proportion to the definiteness of the difference between the units4 ,take a handful of any pounded substance1 containing fragments of all sizes2 and let it fall to the ground while a gentle breeze is blowing4 ,the large fragments will be collected together on the ground almost immediately under the hand2 somewhat smaller fragments will be carried a little to the leeward2 still smaller ones a little further2 and those minute particles which we call dust1 will be drifted a long way before they reach the earth3 that is1 the integration is indefinite where the difference among the fragments is indefinite1 though the divergence is greatest where the difference is greatest4 ,if1 again1 the handful be made up of quite distinct orders of units--as pebbles1 coarse sand1 and dust--these will1 under like conditions1 be segregated with comparative definiteness3 the pebbles will drop almost vertically2 the sand will fall in an inclined direction1 and deposit itself within a tolerably circumscribed space beyond the pebbles2 while the dust will be blown almost horizontally to a great distance4 ,a case in which another kind of force comes into play1 will still better illustrate this truth4 ,through a mixed aggregate of soluble and insoluble substances1 let water slowly percolate4 ,there will in the first place be a distinct parting of the substances that are the most widely contrasted in their relations to the acting forces3 the soluble will be carried away2 the insoluble will remain behind4 ,further1 some separation1 though a less definite one1 will be effected among the soluble substances2 since the first part of the current will remove the most soluble substances in the largest amounts1 and after these have been all dissolved1 the current will still continue to bring out the remaining less soluble substances4 ,even the undissolved matters will have simultaneously undergone a certain segregation2 for the percolating fluid will carry down the minute fragments from among the large ones1 and will deposit those of small specific gravity in one place1 and those of great specific gravity in another4 ,to complete the elucidation we must glance at the obverse fact2 namely1 that mixed units which differ but slightly1 are moved in but slightly-different ways by incident forces1 and can therefore be separated only by such adjustments of the incident forces as allow slight differences to become appreciable factors in the result4 ,this truth is made manifest by antithesis in the instances just given2 but it may be made much more manifest by a few such instances as those which chemical analysis supplies in abundance4 ,the parting of alcohol from water by distillation is a good one4 ,here we have atoms consisting of oxygen and hydrogen1 mingled with atoms consisting of oxygen1 hydrogen1 and carbon4 ,the two orders of atoms have a considerable similarity of nature3 they similarly maintain a fluid form at ordinary temperatures2 they similarly become gaseous more and more rapidly as the temperature is raised2 and they boil at points not very far apart4 ,now this comparative likeness of the atoms is accompanied by difficulty in segregating them4 ,if the mixed fluid is unduly heated1 much water distils over with the alcohol3 it is only within a narrow range of temperature1 that the one set of atoms are driven off rather than the others2 and even then not a few of the others accompany them4 ,the most interesting and instructive example1 however1 is furnished by certain phenomena of crystallization4 ,when several salts that have little analogy of constitution1 are dissolved in the same body of water1 they are separated without much trouble1 by crystallization3 their respective units moved towards each other1 as physicists suppose1 by polar forces1 segregate into crystals of their respective kinds4 ,the crystals of each salt do1 indeed1 usually contain certain small amounts of the other salts present in the solution--especially when the crystallization has been rapid2 but from these other salts they are severally freed by repeated resolutions and crystallizations4 ,mark now1 however1 that the reverse is the case when the salts contained in the same body of water are chemically homologous4 ,the nitrates of baryta and lead1 or the sulphates of zinc1 soda1 and magnesia1 unite in the same crystals2 nor will they crystallize separately if these crystals be dissolved afresh1 and afresh crystallized1 even with great care4 ,on seeking the cause of this anomaly1 chemists found that such salts were isomorphous--that their atoms1 though not chemically identical1 were identical in the proportions of acid1 base1 and water1 composing them1 and in their crystalline forms3 whence it was inferred that their atoms are nearly alike in structure4 ,thus is clearly illustrated the truth1 that units of unlike kinds are differentiated and integrated with a readiness proportionate to the degree of their unlikeness4 ,in the first case we see that being dissimilar in their forms1 but similar in so far as they are soluble in water of a certain temperature1 the atoms segregate1 though imperfectly4 ,in the second case we see that the atoms1 having not only the likeness implied by solubility in the same menstruum1 but also a great likeness of structure1 do not segregate--are differentiated and integrated only under quite special conditions1 and then very incompletely4 ,that is1 the incident force of mutual polarity impresses unlike motions on the mixed units in proportion as they are unlike2 and therefore1 in proportion as they are unlike1 tends to deposit them in separate places4 ,there is a converse cause of segregation1 which it is needless here to treat of with equal fulness4 ,if different units acted on by the same force1 must be differently moved2 so1 too1 must units of the same kind be differently moved by different forces4 ,supposing some group of units forming part of a homogeneous aggregate1 are unitedly exposed to a force that is unlike in amount or direction to the force acting on the rest of the aggregate2 then this group of units will separate from the rest1 provided that1 of the force so acting on it1 there remains any portion not dissipated in molecular vibrations1 nor absorbed in producing molecular re-arrangements4 ,after all that has been said above1 this proposition needs no defence4 ,before ending our preliminary exposition1 a complementary truth must be specified2 namely1 that mixed forces are segregated by the reaction of uniform matters1 just as mixed matters are segregated by the action of uniform forces4 ,of this truth a complete and sufficient illustration is furnished by the dispersion of refracted light4 ,a beam of light1 made up of ethereal undulations of different orders1 is not uniformly deflected by a homogeneous refracting body2 but the different orders of undulations it contains1 are deflected at different angles3 the result being that these different orders of undulations are separated and integrated1 and so produce what we know as the colours of the spectrum4 ,a segregation of another kind occurs when rays of light traverse an obstructing medium4 ,those rays which consist of comparatively short undulations1 are absorbed before those which consist of comparatively long ones2 and the red rays1 which consist of the longest undulations1 alone penetrate when the obstruction is very great4 ,how1 conversely1 there is produced a separation of like forces by the reaction of unlike matters1 is also made manifest by the phenomena of refraction3 since adjacent and parallel beams of light1 falling on1 and passing through1 unlike substances1 are made to diverge4 99 99 99 99 99 #abd4 ,on the assumption of their nebular origin1 stars and planets exemplify that cause of material integration last assigned--the action of unlike forces on like units4 ,in a preceding chapter 7 #aaj7 we saw that if matter ever existed in a diffused form1 it could not continue uniformly distributed1 but must break up into masses4 ,it was shown that in the absence of a perfect balance of mutual attractions among atoms dispersed through unlimited space1 there must arise breeches of continuity throughout the aggregate formed by them1 and a concentration of it towards centres of dominant attraction4 ,where any such breech of continuity occurs1 and the atoms that were before adjacent separate from each other2 they do so in consequence of a difference in the forces to which they are respectively subject4 ,the atoms on the one side of the breech are exposed to a certain surplus attraction in the direction in which they begin to move2 and those on the other to a surplus attraction in the opposite direction4 ,that is1 the adjacent groups of like units are exposed to unlike resultant forces2 and accordingly separate and integrate4 ,the formation and detachment of a nebulous ring1 illustrates the same general principle4 ,to conclude1 as ,laplace did1 that the equatorial portion of a rotating nebulous spheroid1 will1 during concentration1 acquire a centrifugal force sufficient to prevent it from following the rest of the contracting mass1 is to conclude that such portions will remain behind as are in common subject to a certain differential force4 ,the line of division between the ring and the spheroid1 must be a line inside of which the aggregative force is greater than the force resisting aggregation2 and outside of which the force resisting aggregation is greater than the aggregative force4 ,hence the alleged process conforms to the law that among like units1 separation and integration is produced by the action of unlike forces4 ,astronomical phenomena do not furnish any other than these hypothetical examples4 ,in its present comparatively settled condition1 the ,solar ,system exhibits no direct evidence of progressing integration3 unless indeed under the insignificant form of the union of meteoric masses with the ,earth1 and1 occasionally perhaps1 of cometary matter with the ,sun4 99 99 99 99 99 #abe4 ,those geologic changes usually classed as aqueous1 display under numerous forms the segregation of unlike units by a uniform incident force4 ,on sea-shores1 the waves are ever sorting-out and separating the mixed materials against which they break4 ,from each mass of fallen cliff1 the rising and ebbing tide carries away all those particles which are so small as to remain long suspended in the water2 and1 at some distance from shore1 deposits them in the shape of fine sediment4 ,large particles1 sinking with comparative rapidity1 are accumulated into beds of sand near low water-mark4 ,the coarse grit and small pebbles collect together on the incline up which the breakers rush4 ,and on the top lie the larger stones and boulders4 ,still more specific segregations may occasionally be observed4 ,flat pebbles1 produced by the breaking down of laminated rock1 are sometimes separately collected in one part of a shingle bank4 ,on this shore the deposit is wholly of mud2 on that it is wholly of sand4 ,here we find a sheltered cove filled with small pebbles almost of one size2 and there1 in a curved bay one end of which is more exposed than the other1 we see a progressive increase in the massiveness of the stones as we walk from the less exposed to the more exposed end4 ,indeed1 our sedimentary strata form one vast series of illustrations of the alleged law4 ,trace the history of each deposit1 and we are quickly led down to the fact1 that mixed fragments of matter1 differing in their sizes or weights1 are1 when exposed to the momentum and friction of water1 joined with the attraction of the ,earth1 selected from each other1 and united into groups of comparatively like fragments4 ,we see that1 other things equal1 the separation is definite in proportion as the differences of the units are marked2 and that1 under the action of the same aggregate of forces1 the most widely unlike units are most widely removed from each other4 ,among igneous changes we do not find so many examples of the process described4 ,when specifying the conditions to ,evolution1 it was pointed out 7 #ajd7 that molecular vibration exceeding a certain intensity1 does not permit those integrations which result from the action of minor differential forces4 ,nevertheless1 geological phenomena of this order are not barren of illustrations4 ,where the mixed matters composing the ,earth's crust have been raised to a very high temperature1 segregation habitually takes place as the temperature diminishes4 ,sundry of the substances that escape in a gaseous form from volcanoes1 sublime into crystals on coming against cool surfaces2 and solidifying1 as these substances do1 at different temperatures1 they are deposited at different parts of the crevices through which they are emitted together4 ,the best illustration1 however1 is furnished by the changes that occur during the slow cooling of igneous rock4 ,when1 through one of the fractures from time to time made in the solid shell which forms the ,earth's crust1 a portion of the molten nucleus is extruded2 and when this is cooled with comparative rapidity1 through free radiation and contact with cold masses2 it forms a substance known as trap or basalt--a substance that is uniform in texture1 though made up of various ingredients4 ,but when1 not escaping through the superficial strata1 such a portion of the molten nucleus is slowly cooled1 it becomes what we know as granite3 the mingled particles of quartz1 feldspar1 and mica1 being kept for a long time in a fluid and semi-fluid state--a state of comparative mobility--undergo those changes of position which the forces impressed on them by their fellow units necessitate4 ,having time in which to generate the requisite motions of the atoms1 the differential forces arising from mutual polarity1 segregate the quartz1 feldspar1 and mica1 into crystals4 ,how completely this is dependent on the long-continued agitation of the mixed particles1 and consequent long-continued mobility by small differential forces1 is proved by the fact that in granite dykes1 the crystals in the centre of the mass1 where the fluidity or semi-fluidity continued for a longer time1 are much larger than those at the sides1 where contact with the neighbouring rock caused more rapid cooling and solidification4 99 99 99 99 99 #abf4 ,the actions going on throughout an organism are so involved and subtle1 that we cannot expect to identify the particular forces by which particular integrations are effected4 ,among the few instances admitting of tolerably definite interpretation1 the best are those in which mechanical pressures and tensions are the agencies at work4 ,we shall discover several on studying the bony frame of the higher animals4 ,the vertebral column of a man1 is subject1 as a whole1 to certain general strains--the weight of the body1 together with the reactions involved by all considerable muscular efforts2 and in conformity with this1 it has a certain general integration4 ,at the same time1 being exposed to different forces in the course of those lateral bendings which the movements necessitate1 its parts retain a certain separateness4 ,and if we trace up the development of the vertebral column from its primitive form of a cartilaginous cord in the lowest fishes1 we see that1 throughout1 it maintains an integration corresponding to the unity of the incident forces1 joined with a division into segments corresponding to the variety of the incident forces4 ,each segment1 considered apart1 exemplifies the truth more simply4 ,a vertebra is not a single bone1 but consists of a central mass with sundry appendages or processes2 and in rudimentary types of vertebr1 those appendages are quite separate from the central mass1 and1 indeed1 exist before it makes its appearance4 ,but these several independent bones1 constituting a primitive spinal segment1 are subject to a certain aggregate of forces which agree more than they differ3 as the fulcrum to a group of muscles habitually acting together1 they perpetually undergo certain reactions in common4 ,and accordingly1 we see that in the course of development they gradually coalesce4 ,still clearer is the illustration furnished by spinal segments that become fused together where they are together exposed to some predominant strain4 ,the sacrum consists of a group of vertebr firmly united4 ,in the ostrich and its congeners there are from seventeen to twenty sacral vertebr2 and besides being confluent with each other1 these are confluent with the iliac bones1 which run on each side of them4 ,if now we assume these vertebr to have been originally separate1 as they still are in the embryo bird2 and if we consider the mechanical conditions to which they must in such case have been exposed2 we shall see that their union results in the alleged way4 ,for through these vertebr the entire weight of the body is transferred to the legs3 the legs support the pelvic arch2 the pelvic arch supports the sacrum2 and to the sacrum is articulated the rest of the spine1 with all the limbs and organs attached to it4 ,hence1 if separate1 the sacral vertebr must be held firmly together by strongly-contracted muscles2 and must1 by implication1 be prevented from partaking in those lateral movements which the other vertebr undergo--they must be subject to a common strain1 while they are preserved from strains which would affect them differently2 and so they fulfil the conditions under which integration occurs4 ,but the cases in which cause and effect are brought into the most obvious relation1 are supplied by the limbs4 ,the metacarpal bones 7those which in man support the palm of the hand7 are separate from each other in the majority of mammalia3 the separate actions of the toes entailing on them slight amounts of separate movements4 ,this is not so however in the ox-tribe and the horse-tribe4 ,in the ox-tribe1 only the middle metacarpals 7third and fourth7 are developed2 and these1 attaining massive proportions1 coalesce to form the cannon bone4 ,in the horse-tribe1 the integration is what we may distinguish as indirect3 the second and fourth metacarpals are present only as rudiments united to the sides of the third1 while the third is immensely developed2 thus forming a cannon bone which differs from that of the ox in being a single cylinder1 instead of two cylinders fused together4 ,the metatarsus in these quadrupeds exhibits parallel changes4 ,now each of these metamorphoses occurs where the different bones grouped together have no longer any different functions1 but retain only a common function4 ,the feet of oxen and horses are used solely for locomotion--are not put like those of unguiculate mammals to purposes which involve some relative movements of the metacarpals4 ,thus there directly or indirectly results a single mass of bone where the incident force is single4 ,and for the inference that these facts have a causal connexion1 we find confirmation throughout the entire class of birds2 in the wings and legs of which1 like integrations are found under like conditions4 ,while this sheet is passing through the press1 a fact illustrating this general truth in a yet more remarkable manner1 has been mentioned to me by ,prof4 ,huxley2 who kindly allows me to make use of it while still unpublished by him4 ,the ,glyptodon1 an extinct mammal found fossilized in ,south ,america1 has long been known as a large uncouth creature allied to the ,armadillo1 but having a massive dermal armour consisting of polygonal plates closely fitted together so as to make a vast box1 inclosing the body in such way as effectually to prevent it from being bent1 laterally or vertically1 in the slightest degree4 ,this bony box1 which must have weighed several hundred-weight1 was supported on the spinous processes of the vertebr1 and on the adjacent bones of the pelvic and thoracic arches4 ,and the significant fact now to be noted1 is1 that here1 where the trunk vertebr were together exposed to the pressure of this heavy dermal armour1 at the same time that1 by its rigidity1 they were preserved from all relative movements1 the entire series of them were united into one solid1 continuous bone4 ,the formation and maintenance of a species1 considered as an assemblage of similar organisms1 is interpretable in an analogous way4 ,we have already seen that in so far as the members of a species are subject to different sets of incident forces1 they are differentiated1 or divided into varieties4 ,and here it remains to add that in so far as they are subject to like sets of incident forces1 they are integrated1 or reduced to1 and kept in1 the state of a uniform aggregate4 ,for by the process of 8natural selection10 there is a continual purification of each species from those individuals which depart from the common type in ways that unfit them for the conditions of their existence4 ,consequently1 there is a continual leaving behind of those individuals which are in all respects fit for the conditions of their existence2 and are therefore very nearly alike4 ,the circumstances to which any species is exposed1 being1 as we before saw1 an involved combination of incident forces2 and the members of the species having mixed with them some that differ more than usual from the average structure required for meeting these forces2 it results that these forces are constantly separating such divergent individuals from the rest1 and so preserving the uniformity of the rest--keeping up its integrity as a species4 ,just as the changing autumn leaves are picked out by the wind from among the green ones around them1 or just as1 to use ,prof4 ,huxley's simile1 the smaller fragments pass through the sieve while the larger are kept back2 so1 the uniform incidence of external forces affects the members of a group of organisms similarly in proportion as they are similar1 and differently in proportion as they are different2 and thus is ever segregating the like by parting the unlike from them4 ,whether these separated members are killed off1 as mostly happens1 or whether1 as otherwise happens1 they survive and multiply into a distinct variety1 in consequence of their fitness to certain partially unlike conditions1 matters not to the argument4 ,the one case conforms to the law1 that the unlike units of an aggregate are differentiated and integrated when uniformly subject to the same incident forces2 and the other to the converse law1 that the like units of an aggregate are differentiated and integrated when subject to different incident forces4 ,and on consulting ,mr4 ,darwin's remarks on divergence of character1 it will be seen that the segregations thus caused tend ever to become more definite4 99 99 99 99 99 #abg4 ,mental evolution under one of its leading aspects1 we found to consist in the formation of groups of like objects and like relations--a differentiation of the various things originally confounded together in one assemblage1 and an integration of each separate order of things into a separate group 7 #aac74 ,here it remains to point out that while unlikeness in the incident forces is the cause of such differentiations1 likeness in the incident forces is the cause of such integrations4 ,for what is the process through which classifications are established8 ,at first1 in common with the uninitiated1 the botanist recognizes only such conventional divisions as those which agriculture has established--distinguishes a few vegetables and cereals1 and groups the rest together into the one miscellaneous aggregate of wild plants4 ,how do these wild plants become grouped in his mind into orders1 genera1 and species8 ,each plant he examines yields him a certain complex impression4 ,every now and then he picks up a plant like one before seen2 and the recognition of it is the production in him of a like connected group of sensations1 by a like connected group of attributes4 ,that is to say1 there is produced throughout the nerves concerned1 a combined set of changes1 similar to a combined set of changes before produced4 ,considered analytically1 each such combined set of changes is a combined set of molecular modifications wrought in the affected part of the organism4 ,on every repetition of the impression1 a like combined set of molecular modifications is superposed on the previous ones1 and makes them greater3 thus generating an internal idea corresponding to these similar external objects4 ,meanwhile1 another kind of plant produces in the brain of the botanist another set of combined changes or molecular modifications--a set which does not agree with and deepen the one we have been considering1 but disagrees with it2 and by repetition of such there is generated a different idea answering to a different species4 ,what now is the nature of this process expressed in general terms8 ,on the one hand there are the like and unlike things from which severally emanate the groups of forces by which we perceive them4 ,on the other hand1 there are the organs of sense and percipient centres1 through which1 in the course of observation1 these groups of forces pass4 ,in passing through these organs of sense and percipient centres1 the like groups of forces are segregated1 or separated from the unlike groups of forces2 and each such differentiated and integrated series of groups of forces1 answering to an external genus or species1 constitutes a state of consciousness which we call our idea of the genus or species4 ,we before saw that as well as a separation of mixed matters by the same force1 there is a separation of mixed forces by the same matter2 and here we may further see that the unlike forces so separated1 work unlike structural changes in the aggregate that separates them--structural changes each of which thus represents1 and is equivalent to1 the integrated series of motions that has produced it4 ,by a parallel process1 the connexions of co-existence and sequence among impressions1 become differentiated and integrated simultaneously with the impressions themselves4 ,when two phenomena that have been experienced in a given order1 are repeated in the same order1 those nerves which before were affected by the transition are again affected2 and such molecular modification as they received from the first motion propagated through them1 is increased by this second motion along the same route4 ,each such motion works a structural alteration1 which1 in conformity with the general law set forth in ,chapter ,x41 involves a diminution of the resistance to all such motions that afterwards occur4 ,the integration of these successive motions 7or more strictly1 the permanently effective portions of them expended in overcoming resistance7 thus becomes the cause of1 and the measure of1 the mental connexion between the impressions which the phenomena produce4 ,meanwhile1 phenomena that are recognized as different from these1 being phenomena that therefore affect different nervous elements1 will have their connexions severally represented by motions along other routes2 and along each of these other routes1 the nervous discharges will severally take place with a readiness proportionate to the frequency with which experience repeats the connexion of phenomena4 ,the classification of relations must hence go on pari passu with the classification of the related things4 ,in common with the mixed sensations received from the external world1 the mixed relations it presents1 cannot be impressed on the organism without more or less segregation of them resulting4 ,and through this continuous differentiation and integration of changes or motions1 which constitutes nervous function1 there is gradually wrought that differentiation and integration of matter1 which constitutes nervous structure4 99 99 99 99 99 #abh4 ,in social evolution1 the collecting together of the like and the separation of the unlike1 by incident forces1 is primarily displayed in the same manner as we saw it to be among groups of inferior creatures4 ,the human races tend to differentiate and integrate1 as do races of other living forms4 ,of the forces which effect and maintain the segregations of mankind1 may first be named those external ones which we class as physical conditions4 ,the climate and food that are favourable to an indigenous people1 are more or less detrimental to a people of different bodily constitution1 coming from a remote part of the ,earth4 ,in tropical regions the northern races cannot permanently exist3 if not killed off in the first generation1 they are so in the second2 and1 as in ,india1 can maintain their footing only by the artificial process of continuous immigration and emigration4 ,that is to say1 the external forces acting equally on the inhabitants of a given locality1 tend to expel all who are not of a certain type2 and so to keep up the integration of those who are of that type4 ,though elsewhere1 as among ,european nations1 we see a certain amount of permanent intermixture1 otherwise brought about1 we still see that this takes place between races of not very different types1 that are naturalized to not very different conditions4 ,the other forces conspiring to produce these national integrations1 are those mental ones which show themselves in the affinities of men for others like themselves4 ,emigrants usually desire to get back among their own people2 and where their desire does not take effect1 it is only because the restraining ties are too great4 ,units of one society who are obliged to reside in another1 very generally form colonies in the midst of that other--small societies of their own4 ,races which have been artificially severed1 show strong tendencies to re-unite4 ,now though these integrations that result from the mutual affinities of kindred men1 do not seem interpretable as illustrations of the general principle above enunciated1 they really are thus interpretable4 ,when treating of the direction of motion 7 #ia71 it was shown that the actions performed by men for the satisfaction of their wants1 were always motions along lines of least resistance4 ,the feelings characterizing a member of a given race1 are feelings which get complete satisfaction only among other members of that race--a satisfaction partly derived from sympathy with those having like feelings1 but mainly derived from the adapted social conditions which grow up where such feelings prevail4 ,when1 therefore1 a citizen of any nation is1 as we see1 attracted towards others of his nation1 the rationale is1 that certain agencies which we call desires1 move him in the direction of least resistance4 ,human motions1 like all other motions1 being determined by the distribution of forces1 it follows that such integrations of races as are not produced by incident external forces1 are produced by forces which the units of the races exercise on each other4 ,during the development of each society1 we see analogous segregations caused in analogous ways4 ,a few of them result from minor natural affinities2 but those most important ones which constitute political and industrial organization1 result from the union of men in whom similarities have been produced by education--using education in its widest sense1 as comprehending all processes by which citizens are moulded to special functions4 ,men brought up to bodily labour1 are men who have had wrought in them a certain likeness--a likeness which1 in respect of their powers of action1 obscures and subordinates their natural differences4 ,those trained to brain-work1 have acquired a certain other community of character which makes them1 as social units1 more like each other than like those trained to manual occupations4 ,and there arise class-integrations answering to these superinduced likenesses4 ,much more definite integrations take place among the much more definitely assimilated members of any class who are brought up to the same calling4 ,even where the necessities of their work forbid concentration in one locality1 as among artizans happens with masons and brick-layers1 and among traders happens with the retail distributors1 and among professionals happens with the medical men2 there are not wanting ,operative ,builders ,unions1 and ,grocers ,societies1 and ,medical ,associations1 to show that these artificially-assimilated citizens become integrated as much as the conditions permit4 ,and where1 as among the manufacturing classes1 the functions discharged do not require the dispersion of the citizens thus artificially assimilated1 there is a progressive aggregation of them in special localities2 and a consequent increase in the definiteness of the industrial divisions4 ,if now we seek the causes of these integrations1 considered as results of force and motion1 we find ourselves brought to the same general principle as before4 ,this likeness generated in any class or subclass by training1 is an aptitude acquired by its members for satisfying their wants in like ways4 ,that is1 the occupation to which each man has been brought up1 has become to him1 in common with those similarly brought up1 a line of least resistance4 ,hence under that pressure which determines all men to activity1 these similarly-modified social units are similarly affected1 and tend to take similar courses4 ,if then there be any locality which1 either by its physical peculiarities or by peculiarities wrought on it during social evolution1 is rendered a place where a certain kind of industrial action meets with less resistance than elsewhere2 it follows from the law of direction of motion that those social units who have been moulded to this kind of industrial action1 will move towards this place1 or become integrated there4 ,if1 for instance1 the proximity of coal and iron mines to a navigable river1 gives to ,glasgow a certain advantage in the building of iron ships--if the total labour required to produce the same vessel1 and get its equivalent in food and clothing1 is less there than elsewhere2 a concentration of iron-ship builders is produced at ,glasgow3 either by keeping there the population born to iron-ship building2 or by immigration of those elsewhere engaged in it2 or by both--a concentration that would be still more marked did not other districts offer counter-balancing facilities4 ,the principle equally holds where the occupation is mercantile instead of manufacturing4 ,stock-brokers cluster together in the city1 because the amount of effort to be severally gone through by them in discharging their functions1 and obtaining their profits1 is less there than in other localities4 ,a place of exchange having once been established1 becomes a place where the resistance to be overcome by each is less than elsewhere2 and the pursuit of the course of least resistance by each1 involves their aggregation around this place4 ,of course1 with units so complicated as those which constitute a society1 and with forces so involved as those which move them1 the resulting differentiations and integrations must be far more entangled1 or far less definite1 than those we have hitherto considered4 ,but though there may be pointed out many anomalies which at first sight seem inconsistent with the alleged law1 a closer study shows that they are but subtler illustrations of it4 ,for men's likenesses being of various kinds1 lead to various order of integration4 ,there are likenesses of disposition1 likenesses of taste1 likenesses produced by intellectual culture1 likenesses that result from class-training1 likenesses of political feeling2 and it needs but to glance round at the caste-divisions1 the associations for philanthropic1 scientific1 and artistic purposes1 the religious parties and social cliques2 to see that some species of likeness among the component members of each body determines their union4 ,now these different integrations1 by traversing each other1 and often by their indirect antagonism1 more or less obscure each other2 and prevent any one kind of integration from becoming complete4 ,hence the anomalies referred to4 ,but if this cause of incompleteness be duly borne in mind1 social segregations will be seen to conform entirely to the same principle as all other segregations4 ,analysis will show that either by external incident forces1 or by what we may in a sense regard as mutual polarity1 there are ever being produced in society integrations of those units which have either a natural likeness or a likeness generated by training4 99 99 99 99 99 #abi4 ,can the general truth thus variously illustrated be deduced from the persistence of force1 in common with foregoing ones8 ,probably the exposition at the beginning of the chapter will have led most readers to conclude that it can be so deduced4 ,the abstract propositions involved are these3--,first1 that like units1 subject to a uniform force capable of producing motion in them1 will be moved to like degrees in the same direction4 ,second1 that like units if exposed to unlike forces capable of producing motion in them1 will be differently moved--moved either in different directions or to different degrees in the same direction4 ,third1 that unlike units if acted on by a uniform force capable of producing motion in them1 will be differently moved--moved either in different directions or to different degrees in the same direction4 ,fourth1 that the incident forces themselves must be affected in analogous ways3 like forces falling on like units must be similarly modified by the conflict2 unlike forces falling on like units must be dissimilarly modified2 and like forces falling on unlike units must be dissimilarly modified4 ,these propositions admit of reduction to a still more abstract form4 ,they all of them amount to this3--that in the actions and reactions of force and matter1 an unlikeness in either of the factors necessitates an unlikeness in the effects2 and that in the absence of unlikeness in either of the factors the effects must be alike4 ,when thus generalized1 the immediate dependence of these propositions on the persistence of force1 becomes obvious4 ,any two forces that are not alike1 are forces which differ either in their amounts or directions or both2 and by what mathematicians call the resolution of forces1 it may be proved that this difference is constituted by the presence in the one of some force not present in the other4 ,similarly1 any two units or portions of matter which are unlike in size1 weight1 form1 or other attribute1 can be known by us as unlike only through some unlikeness in the forces they impress on our consciousness2 and hence this unlikeness also1 is constituted by the presence in the one of some force or forces not present in the other4 ,such being the common nature of these unlikenesses1 what is the inevitable corollary8 ,any unlikeness in the incident forces1 where the things acted on are alike1 must generate a difference between the effects2 since otherwise1 the differential force produces no effect1 and force is not persistent4 ,any unlikeness in the things acted on1 where the incident forces are alike1 must generate a difference between the effects2 since otherwise1 the differential force whereby these things are made unlike1 produces no effect1 and force is not persistent4 ,while1 conversely1 if the forces acting and the things acted on1 are alike1 the effects must be alike2 since otherwise1 a differential effect can be produced without a differential cause1 and force is not persistent4 ,thus these general truths being necessary implications of the persistence of force1 all the re-distributions above traced out as characterizing ,evolution in its various phases1 are also implications of the persistence of force4 ,such portions of the permanently effective forces acting on any aggregate1 as produce sensible motions in its parts1 cannot but work the segregations which we see take place4 ,if of the mixed units making up such aggregate1 those of the same kind have like motions impressed on them by a uniform force1 while units of another kind are moved by this uniform force in ways more or less unlike the ways in which those of the first kind are moved1 the two kinds must separate and integrate4 ,if the units are alike and the forces unlike1 a division of the differently affected units is equally necessitated4 ,thus there inevitably arises the demarcated grouping which we everywhere see4 ,by virtue of this segregation that grows ever more decided while there remains any possibility of increasing it1 the change from uniformity to multiformity is accompanied by a change from indistinctness in the relations of parts to distinctness in the relations of parts4 ,as we before saw that the transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous is inferrable from that ultimate truth which transcends proof2 so we here see1 that from this same truth is inferrable the transformation of an indefinite homogeneity into a definite heterogeneity4 ,,chapter ,,xvi4 ,,equilibration4 #acj4 ,and now towards what do these changes tend8 ,will they go on for ever8 or will there be an end to them8 ,can things increase in heterogeneity through all future time8 or must there be a degree which the differentiation and integration of ,matter and ,motion cannot pass8 ,is it possible for this universal metamorphosis to proceed in the same general course indefinitely8 or does it work towards some ultimate state1 admitting no further modification of like kind8 ,the last of these alternative conclusions is that to which we are inevitably driven4 ,whether we watch concrete processes1 or whether we consider the question in the abstract1 we are alike taught that ,evolution has an impassable limit4 ,the re-distributions of matter that go on around us1 are ever being brought to conclusions by the dissipation of the motions which effect them4 ,the rolling stone parts with portions of its momentum to the things it strikes1 and finally comes to rest2 as do also1 in like manner1 the various things it has struck4 ,descending from the clouds and trickling over the ,earth's surface till it gathers into brooks and rivers1 water1 still running towards a lower level1 is at last arrested by the resistance of other water that has reached the lowest level4 ,in the lake or sea thus formed1 every agitation raised by a wind or the immersion of a solid body1 propagates itself around in waves that diminish as they widen1 and gradually become lost to observation in motions communicated to the atmosphere and the matter on the shores4 ,the impulse given by a player to the harp-string1 is transformed through its vibrations into aerial pulses2 and these1 spreading on all sides1 and weakening as they spread1 soon cease to be perceptible2 and finally die away in generating thermal undulations that radiate into space4 ,equally in the cinder that falls out of the fire1 and in the vast masses of molten lava ejected by a volcano1 we see that the molecular agitation known to us as heat1 disperses itself by radiation2 so that however great its amount1 it inevitably sinks at last to the same degree as that existing in surrounding bodies4 ,and if the actions observed be electrical or chemical1 we still find that they work themselves out in producing sensible or insensible movements1 that are dissipated as before2 until quiescence is eventually reached4 ,the proximate rationale of the process exhibited under these several forms1 lies in the fact dwelt on when treating of the ,multiplication of ,effects1 that motions are ever being decomposed into divergent motions1 and these into re-divergent motions4 ,the rolling stone sends off the stones it hits in directions differing more or less from its own2 and they do the like with the things they hit4 ,move water or air1 and the movement is quickly resolved into radiating movements4 ,the heat produced by pressure in a given direction1 diffuses itself by undulations in all directions2 and so do the light and electricity similarly generated4 ,that is to say1 these motions undergo division and subdivision2 and by continuance of this process without limit1 they are1 though never lost1 gradually reduced to insensible motions4 ,in all cases then1 there is a progress toward equilibration4 ,that universal co-existence of antagonist forces which1 as we before saw1 necessitates the universality of rhythm1 and which1 as we before saw1 necessitates the decomposition of every force into divergent forces1 at the same time necessitates the ultimate establishment of a balance4 ,every motion being motion under resistance1 is continually suffering deductions2 and these unceasing deductions finally result in the cessation of the motion4 ,the general truth thus illustrated under its simplest aspect1 we must now look at under those more complex aspects it usually presents throughout ,nature4 ,in nearly all cases1 the motion of an aggregate is compound2 and the equilibration of each of its components1 being carried on independently1 does not affect the rest4 ,the ship's bell that has ceased to vibrate1 still continues those vertical and lateral oscillations caused by the ocean-swell4 ,the water of the smooth stream on whose surface have died away the undulations caused by the rising fish1 moves as fast as before onward to the sea4 ,the arrested bullet travels with undiminished speed round the ,earth's axis4 ,and were the rotation of the ,earth destroyed1 there would not be implied any diminution of the ,earth's movement with respect to the ,sun and other external bodies4 ,so that in every case1 what we regard as equilibration is a disappearance of some one or more of the many movements which a body possesses1 while its other movements continue as before4 ,that this process may be duly realized and the state of things towards which it tends fully understood1 it will be well here to cite a case in which we may watch this successive equilibration of combined movements more completely than we can do in those above instanced4 ,our end will best be served1 not by the most imposing1 but by the most familiar example4 ,let us take that of the spinning top4 ,when the string which has been wrapped round a top's axis is violently drawn off1 and the top falls on to the table1 it usually happens that besides the rapid rotation1 two other movements are given to it4 ,a slight horizontal momentum1 unavoidably impressed on it when leaving the handle1 carries it away bodily from the place on which it drops2 and in consequence of its axis being more or less inclined1 it falls into a certain oscillation1 described by the expressive though inelegant word--8wabbling40 ,these two subordinate motions1 variable in their proportions to each other and to the chief motion1 are commonly soon brought to a close by separate processes of equilibration4 ,the momentum which carries the top bodily along the table1 resisted somewhat by the air1 but mainly by the irregularities of the surface1 shortly disappears2 and the top thereafter continues to spin on one spot4 ,meanwhile1 in consequence of that opposition which the axial momentum of a rotating body makes to any change in the plane of rotation1 7so beautifully exhibited by the gyroscope17 the 8wabbling0 diminishes2 and like the other is quickly ended4 ,these minor motions having been dissipated1 the rotatory motion1 interfered with only by atmospheric resistance and the friction of the pivot1 continues some time with such uniformity that the top appears stationary3 there being thus temporarily established a condition which the ,french mathematicians have termed equilibrium mobile4 ,it is true that when the axial velocity sinks below a certain point1 new motions commence1 and increase till the top falls2 but these are merely incidental to a case in which the centre of gravity is above the point of support4 ,were the top1 having an axis of steel1 to be suspended from a surface adequately magnetized1 all the phenomena described would be displayed1 and the moving equilibrium having been once arrived at1 would continue until the top became motionless1 without any further change of position4 ,now the facts which it behoves us here to observe1 are these4 ,first1 that the various motions which an aggregate possesses are separately equilibrated3 those which are smallest1 or which meet with the greatest resistance1 or both1 disappearing first2 and leaving at last1 that which is greatest1 or meets with least resistance1 or both4 ,second1 that when the aggregate has a movement of its parts with respect to each other1 which encounters but little external resistance1 there is apt to be established an equilibrium mobile4 ,third1 that this moving equilibrium eventually lapses into complete equilibrium4 ,fully to comprehend the process of equilibration1 is not easy2 since we have simultaneously to contemplate various phases of it4 ,the best course will be to glance separately at what we may conveniently regard as its four different orders4 ,the first order includes the comparatively simple motions1 as those of projectiles1 which are not prolonged enough to exhibit their rhythmical character2 but which1 being quickly divided and subdivided into motions communicated to other portions of matter1 are presently dissipated in the rhythm of ethereal undulations4 ,in the second order1 comprehending the various kinds of vibration or oscillation as usually witnessed1 the motion is used up in generating a tension which1 having become equal to it or momentarily equilibrated with it1 thereupon produces a motion in the opposite direction1 that is subsequently equilibrated in like manner3 thus causing a visible rhythm1 that is1 however1 soon lost in invisible rhythms4 ,the third order of equilibration1 not hitherto noticed1 obtains in those aggregates which continually receive as much motion as they expend4 ,the steam engine 7and especially that kind which feeds its own furnace and boiler7 supplies an example4 ,here the force from moment to moment dissipated in overcoming the resistance of the machinery driven1 is from moment to moment replaced from the fuel2 and the balance of the two is maintained by a raising or lowering of the expenditure according to the variation of the supply3 each increase or decrease in the quantity of steam1 resulting in a rise or fall of the engine's movement1 such as brings it to a balance with the increased or decreased resistance4 ,this1 which we may fitly call the dependent moving equilibrium1 should be specially noted2 since it is one that we shall commonly meet with throughout various phases of ,evolution4 ,the equilibration to be distinguished as of the fourth order1 is the independent or perfect moving equilibrium4 ,this we see illustrated in the rhythmical motions of the ,solar ,system2 which1 being resisted only by a medium of inappreciable density1 undergo no sensible diminution in such periods of time as we can measure4 ,all these kinds of equilibration may1 however1 from the highest point of view1 be regarded as different modes of one kind4 ,for in every case the balance arrived at is relative1 and not absolute--is a cessation of the motion of some particular body in relation to a certain point or points1 involving neither the disappearance of the relative motion lost1 which is simply transformed into other motions1 nor a diminution of the body's motions with respect to other points4 ,thus understanding equilibration1 it manifestly includes that equilibrium mobile1 which at first sight seems of another nature4 ,for any system of bodies exhibiting1 like those of the ,solar ,system1 a combination of balanced rhythms1 has this peculiarity2--that though the constituents of the system have relative movements1 the system as a whole has no movement4 ,the centre of gravity of the entire group remains fixed4 ,whatever quantity of motion any member of it has in any direction1 is from moment to moment counter-balanced by an equivalent motion in some other part of the group in an opposite direction2 and so the aggregate matter of the group is in a state of rest4 ,whence it follows that the arrival at a state of moving equilibrium1 is the disappearance of some movement which the aggregate had in relation to external things1 and a continuance of those movements only which the different parts of the aggregate have in relation to each other4 ,thus generalizing the process1 it becomes clear that all forms of equilibration are intrinsically the same2 since in every aggregate1 it is the centre of gravity only that loses its motion3 the constituents always retaining some motion with respect to each other--the motion of molecules if none else4 ,those readers who happen to bear in mind a proposition concerning the functional characteristics of ,evolution1 which was set forth in ,chapter ,,xii1 will probably regard it as wholly at variance with that set forth in this ,chapter4 ,it was there alleged that throughout ,evolution1 integration of matter is accompanied by integration of such motion as the matter previously had2 and that thus there is a transformation of diffused motion into aggregated motion1 parallel to the transformation of diffused matter into aggregated matter4 ,here however1 it is asserted that every aggregate motion is constantly undergoing diffusion--every integrated motion undergoing perpetual disintegration4 ,and so the motion of masses1 which before was said gradually to arise out of molecular motion1 is here said to be gradually lost in molecular motion4 ,doubtless these statements1 if severally accepted without qualification1 are contradictory4 ,neither of them1 however1 expresses the whole truth4 ,each needs the other as its indispensable complement4 ,it is quite true1 as before alleged1 that there goes on an integration of motion corresponding to the integration of matter2 and that this essential characteristic of ,evolution1 functionally considered1 is clearly displayed in proportion as the ,evolution is active4 ,but the disintegration of motion1 which1 as we before saw1 constitutes ,dissolution1 functionally considered1 is all along going on2 and though at first it forms but a small deduction from the change constituting ,evolution1 it gradually becomes equal to it1 and eventually exceeding it1 entails reverse changes4 ,the aggregation of matter never being complete1 but leaving behind less aggregated or unaggregated matter1 in the shape of liquid1 aeriform1 or ethereal media2 it results that from the beginning1 the integrated motion of integrated masses1 is ever being obstructed by these less integrated or unintegrated media4 ,so that though while the integration of matter is rapidly going on1 there is an increase of integrated motion1 spite of the deductions thus continually made from it1 there comes a time when the integration of matter and consequently of motion1 ceases to increase1 or increases so slowly that the deductions counterbalance it2 and thenceforth these begin to decrease it1 and1 by its perpetual diffusion1 to bring about a relative equilibration4 ,from the beginning1 the process of ,evolution is antagonized by a process of ,dissolution2 and while the first for a long time predominates1 the last finally arrests and reverses it4 ,returning from this parenthetical explanation1 we must now especially note two leading truths brought out by the foregoing exposition3 the one concerning the ultimate1 or rather the penultimate1 state of motion which the processes described tend to bring about2 the other concerning the concomitant distribution of matter4 ,this penultimate state of motion is the moving equilibrium2 which1 as we have seen1 tends to arise in an aggregate having compound motions1 as a transitional state on the way towards complete equilibrium4 ,throughout ,evolution of all kinds1 there is a continual approximation to1 and more or less complete maintenance of1 this moving equilibrium4 ,as in the ,solar ,system there has been established an independent moving equilibrium--an equilibrium such that the relative motions of the constituent parts are continually so counter-balanced by opposite motions1 that the mean state of the whole aggregate never varies2 so is it1 though in a less distinct manner1 with each form of dependent moving equilibrium4 ,the state of things exhibited in the cycles of terrestrial changes1 in the balanced functions of organic bodies that have reached their adult forms1 and in the acting and re-acting processes of fully-developed societies1 is similarly one characterized by compensating oscillations4 ,the involved combination of rhythms seen in each of these cases1 has an average condition which remains practically constant during the deviations ever taking place on opposite sides of it4 ,and the fact which we have here particularly to observe1 is1 that as a corollary from the general law of equilibration above set forth1 the evolution of every aggregate must go on until this equilibrium mobile is established2 since1 as we have seen1 an excess of force which the aggregate possesses in any direction1 must eventually be expended in overcoming resistances to change in that direction3 leaving behind only those movements which compensate each other1 and so form a moving equilibrium4 ,respecting the structural state simultaneously reached1 it must obviously be one presenting an arrangement of forces that counterbalance all the forces to which the aggregate is subject4 ,so long as there remains a residual force in any direction--be it excess of a force exercised by the aggregate on its environment1 or of a force exercised by its environment on the aggregate1 equilibrium does not exist2 and therefore the re-distribution of matter must continue4 ,whence it follows that the limit of heterogeneity towards which every aggregate progresses1 is the formation of as many specializations and combinations of parts1 as there are specialized and combined forces to be met4 99 99 99 99 99 #aca4 ,those successively changed forms which1 if the nebular hypothesis be granted1 must have arisen during the evolution of the ,solar ,system1 were so many transitional kinds of moving equilibrium2 severally giving place to more permanent kinds on the way towards complete equilibration4 ,thus the assumption of an oblate spheroidal figure by condensing nebulous matter1 was the assumption of a temporary and partial moving equilibrium among the component parts--a moving equilibrium that must have slowly grown more settled1 as local conflicting movements were dissipated4 ,in the formation and detachment of the nebulous rings1 which1 according to this hypothesis1 from time to time took place1 we have instances of progressive equilibration ending in the establishment of a complete moving equilibrium4 ,for the genesis of each such ring1 implies a perfect balancing of that aggregative force which the whole spheroid exercises on its equatorial portion1 by that centrifugal force which the equatorial portion has acquired during previous concentration3 so long as these two forces are not equal1 the equatorial portion follows the contracting mass2 but as soon as the second force has increased up to an equality with the first1 the equatorial portion can follow no further1 and remains behind4 ,while1 however1 the resulting ring1 regarded as a whole connected by forces with external wholes1 has reached a state of moving equilibrium2 its parts are not balanced with respect to each other4 ,as we before saw 7 #aaj7 the probabilities against the maintenance of an annular form by nebulous matter1 are immense3 from the instability of the homogeneous1 it is inferrable that nebulous matter so distributed must break up into portions2 and eventually concentrate into a single mass4 ,that is to say1 the ring must progress towards a moving equilibrium of a more complete kind1 during the dissipation of that motion which maintained its particles in a diffused form3 leaving at length a planetary body1 attended perhaps by a group of minor bodies1 severally having residuary relative motions that are no longer resisted by sensible media2 and there is thus constituted an equilibrium mobile that is all but absolutely perfect4#ah ,hypothesis aside1 the principle of equilibration is still perpetually illustrated in those minor changes of state which the ,solar ,system is undergoing4 ,each planet1 satellite1 and comet1 exhibits to us at its aphelion a momentary equilibrium between that force which urges it further away from its primary1 and that force which retards its retreat2 since the retreat goes on until the last of these forces exactly counterpoises the first4 ,in like manner at perihelion a converse equilibrium is momentarily established4 ,the variation of each orbit in size1 in eccentricity1 and in the position of its plane1 has similarly a limit at which the forces producing change in the one direction1 are equalled by those antagonizing it2 and an opposite limit at which an opposite arrest takes place4 ,meanwhile1 each of these simple perturbations1 as well as each of the complex ones resulting from their combination1 exhibits1 besides the temporary equilibration at each of its extremes1 a certain general equilibration of compensating deviations on either side of a mean state4 ,that the moving equilibrium thus constituted1 tends1 in the course of indefinite time1 to lapse into a complete equilibrium1 by the gradual decrease of planetary motions and eventually integration of all the separate masses composing the ,solar ,system1 is a belief suggested by certain observed cometary retardations1 and entertained by some of high authority4 ,the received opinion that the appreciable diminution in the period of ,encke's comet1 implies a loss of momentum caused by resistance of the ethereal medium1 commits astronomers who hold it1 to the conclusion that this same resistance must cause a loss of planetary motions--a loss which1 infinitesimal though it may be in such periods as we can measure1 will1 if indefinitely continued1 bring these motions to a close4 ,even should there be1 as ,sir ,john ,herschel suggests1 a rotation of the ethereal medium in the same direction with the planets1 this arrest1 though immensely postponed1 would not be absolutely prevented4 ,such an eventuality1 however1 must in any case be so inconceivably remote as to have no other than a speculative interest for us4 ,it is referred to here1 simply as illustrating the still-continued tendency towards complete equilibrium1 through the still-continued dissipation of sensible motion1 or transformation of it into insensible motion4 ,but there is another species of equilibration going on in the ,solar ,system1 with which we are more nearly concerned--the equilibration of that molecular motion known as heat4 ,the tacit assumption hitherto current1 that the ,sun can continue to give off an undiminished amount of light and heat through all future time1 is fast being abandoned4 ,involving as it does1 under a disguise1 the conception of power produced out of nothing1 it is of the same order as the belief that misleads perpetual-motion schemers4 ,the spreading recognition of the truth that force is persistent1 and that consequently whatever force is manifested under one shape must previously have existed under another shape1 is carrying with it a recognition of the truth that the force known to us in solar radiations1 is the changed form of some other force of which the ,sun is the seat2 and that by the gradual dissipation of these radiations into space1 this other force is being slowly exhausted4 ,the aggregative force by which the ,sun's substance is drawn to his centre of gravity1 is the only one which established physical laws warrant us in suspecting to be the correlate of the forces thus emanating from him3 the only source of a known kind that can be assigned for the insensible motions constituting solar light and heat1 is the sensible motion which disappears during the progressing concentration of the ,sun's substance4 ,we before saw it to be a corollary from the nebular hypothesis1 that there is such a progressing concentration of the ,sun's substance4 ,and here remains to be added the further corollary1 that just as in the case of the smaller members of the ,solar ,system1 the heat generated by concentration1 long ago in great part radiated into space1 has left only a central residue that now escapes but slowly2 so in the case of that immensely larger mass forming the ,sun1 the immensely greater quantity of heat generated and still in process of rapid diffusion1 must1 as the concentration approaches its limit1 diminish in amount1 and eventually leave only an inappreciable internal remnant4 ,with or without the accompaniment of that hypothesis of nebular condensation1 whence1 as we see1 it naturally follows1 the doctrine that the ,sun is gradually losing his heat1 has now gained considerable currency2 and calculations have been made1 both respecting the amount of heat and light already radiated1 as compared with the amount that remains1 and respecting the period during which active radiation is likely to continue4 ,prof4 ,helmholtz estimates1 that since the time when1 according to the nebular hypothesis1 the matter composing the ,solar ,system extended to the orbit of ,neptune1 there has been evolved by the arrest of sensible motion1 an amount of heat #ded times as great as that which the ,sun still has to give out4 ,he also makes an approximate estimate of the rate at which this remaining #a_/dedth is being diffused3 showing that a diminution of the ,sun's diameter to the extent of #a_/aj1jjj1 would produce heat1 at the present rate1 for more than #bjjj years2 or in other words1 that a contraction of #a_/bj1jjj1jjj of his diameter1 suffices to generate the amount of light and heat annually emitted2 and that thus1 at the present rate of expenditure1 the ,sun's diameter will diminish by something like #a_/bj in the lapse of the next million years4#ai ,of course these conclusions are not to be considered as more than rude approximations to the truth4 ,until quite recently1 we have been totally ignorant of the ,sun's chemical composition2 and even now have obtained but a superficial knowledge of it4 ,we know nothing of his internal structure2 and it is quite possible 7probable1 ,i believe17 that the assumptions respecting central density1 made in the foregoing estimates1 are wrong4 ,but no uncertainty in the data on which these calculations proceed1 and no consequent error in the inferred rate at which the ,sun is expending his reserve of force1 militates against the general proposition that this reserve of force is being expended2 and must in time be exhausted4 ,though the residue of undiffused motion in the ,sun1 may be much greater than is above concluded2 though the rate of radiation cannot1 as assumed1 continue at a uniform rate1 but must eventually go on with slowly-decreasing rapidity2 and though the period at which the ,sun will cease to afford us adequate light and heat1 is very possibly far more distant than above implied2 yet such a period must some time be reached1 and this is all which it here concerns us to observe4 ,thus while the ,solar ,system1 if evolved from diffused matter1 has illustrated the law of equilibration in the establishment of a complete moving equilibrium2 and while1 as at present constituted1 it illustrates the law of equilibration in the balancing of all its movements2 it also illustrates this law in the processes which astronomers and physicists infer are still going on4 ,that motion of masses produced during ,evolution1 is being slowly re-diffused in molecular motion of the ethereal medium2 both through the progressive integration of each mass1 and the resistance to its motion through space4 ,infinitely remote as may be the state when all the motions of masses shall be transformed into molecular motion1 and all the molecular motion equilibrated2 yet such a state of complete integration and complete equilibration1 is that towards which the changes now going on throughout the ,solar ,system inevitably tend4 99 99 99 99 99 #acb4 ,a spherical figure is the one which can alone equilibrate the forces of mutually-gravitating atoms4 ,if the aggregate of such atoms has a rotatory motion1 the form of equilibrium becomes a spheroid of greater or less oblateness1 according to the rate of rotation2 and it has been ascertained that the ,earth is an oblate spheroid1 diverging just as much from sphericity as is requisite to counterbalance the centrifugal force consequent on its velocity round its axis4 ,that is to say1 during the evolution of the ,earth1 there has been reached a complete equilibrium of those forces which affect its general outline4 ,the only other process of equilibration which the ,earth as a whole can exhibit1 is the loss of its axial motion2 and that any such loss is going on1 we have no direct evidence4 ,it has been contended1 however1 by ,prof4 ,helmholtz1 that inappreciable as may be its effect within known periods of time1 the friction of the tidal wave must be slowly diminishing the ,earth's rotatory motion1 and must eventually destroy it4 ,now though it seems an oversight to say that the ,earth's rotation can thus be destroyed1 since the extreme effect1 to be reached only in infinite time by such a process1 would be an extension of the ,earth's day to the length of a lunation2 yet it seems clear that this friction of the tidal wave is a real cause of decreasing rotation4 ,slow as its action is1 we must recognize it as exemplifying1 under another form1 the universal progress towards equilibrium4 ,it is needless to point out1 in detail1 how those movements which the ,sun's rays generate in the air and water on the ,earth's surface1 and through them in the ,earth's solid substance1#bj one and all teach the same general truth4 ,evidently the winds and waves and streams1 as well as the denudations and depositions they effect1 perpetually illustrate on a grand scale1 and in endless modes1 that gradual dissipation of motions described in the first section2 and the consequent tendency towards a balanced distribution of forces4 ,each of these sensible motions1 produced directly or indirectly by integration of those insensible motions communicated from the ,sun1 becomes1 as we have seen1 divided and subdivided into motions less and less sensible2 until it is finally reduced to insensible motions1 and radiated from the ,earth in the shape of thermal undulations4 ,in their totality1 these complex movements of aerial1 liquid1 and solid matter on the ,earth's crust1 constitute a dependent moving equilibrium4 ,as we before saw1 there is traceable throughout them an involved combination of rhythms4 ,the unceasing circulation of water from the ocean to the land1 and from the land back to the ocean1 is a type of these various compensating actions2 which1 in the midst of all the irregularities produced by their mutual interferences1 maintain an average4 ,and in this1 as in other equilibrations of the third order1 we see that the power from moment to moment in course of dissipation1 is from moment to moment renewed from without3 the rises and falls in the supply1 being balanced by rises and falls in the expenditure2 as witness the correspondence between the magnetic variations and the cycle of the solar spots4 ,but the fact it chiefly concerns us to observe1 is1 that this process must go on bringing things ever nearer to complete rest4 ,these mechanical movements1 meteorologic and geologic1 which are continually being equilibrated1 both temporarily by counter-movements and permanently by the dissipation of such movements and counter-movements1 will slowly diminish as the quantity of force received from the ,sun diminishes4 ,as the insensible motions propagated to us from the centre of our system become feebler1 the sensible motions here produced by them must decrease2 and at that remote period when the solar heat has ceased to be appreciable1 there will no longer be any appreciable re-distributions of matter on the surface of our planet4 ,thus from the highest point of view1 all terrestrial changes are incidents in the course of cosmical equilibration4 ,it was before pointed out1 7 #hj7 that of the incessant alterations which the ,earth's crust and atmosphere undergo1 those which are not due to the still-progressing motion of the ,earth's substance towards its centre of gravity1 are due to the still-progressing motion of the ,sun's substance towards its centre of gravity4 ,here it is to be remarked1 that this continuance of integration in the ,earth and in the ,sun1 is a continuance of that transformation of sensible motion into insensible motion which we have seen ends in equilibration2 and that the arrival in each case at the extreme of integration1 is the arrival at a state in which no more sensible motion remains to be transformed into insensible motion--a state in which the forces producing integration and the forces opposing integration1 have become equal4 99 99 99 99 99 #acc4 ,every living body exhibits1 in a four-fold form1 the process we are tracing out--exhibits it from moment to moment in the balancing of mechanical forces2 from hour to hour in the balancing of functions2 from year to year in the changes of state that compensate changes of condition2 and finally in the complete arrest of vital movements at death4 ,let us consider the facts under these heads4 ,the sensible motion constituting each visible action of an organism1 is soon brought to a close by some adverse force within or without the organism4 ,when the arm is raised1 the motion given to it is antagonized partly by gravity and partly by the internal resistances consequent on structure2 and its motion1 thus suffering continual deduction1 ends when the arm has reached a position at which the forces are equilibrated4 ,the limits of each systole and diastole of the heart1 severally show us a momentary equilibrium between muscular strains that produce opposite movements2 and each gush of blood requires to be immediately followed by another1 because the rapid dissipation of its momentum would otherwise soon bring the mass of circulating fluid to a stand4 ,as much in the actions and re-actions going on among the internal organs1 as in the mechanical balancing of the whole body1 there is at every instant a progressive equilibration of the motions at every instant produced4 ,viewed in their aggregate1 and as forming a series1 the organic functions constitute a dependent moving equilibrium--a moving equilibrium1 of which the motive power is ever being dissipated through the special equilibrations just exemplified1 and is ever being renewed by the taking in of additional motive power4 ,food is a store of force which continually adds to the momentum of the vital actions1 as much as is continually deducted from them by the forces overcome4 ,all the functional movements thus maintained1 are1 as we have seen1 rhythmical 7 #if72 by their union compound rhythms of various lengths and complexities are produced2 and in these simple and compound rhythms1 the process of equilibration1 besides being exemplified at each extreme of every rhythm1 is seen in the habitual preservation of a constant mean1 and in the re-establishment of that mean when accidental causes have produced divergence from it4 ,when1 for instance1 there is a great expenditure of motion through muscular activity1 there arises a re-active demand on those stores of latent motion which are laid up in the form of consumable matter throughout the tissues3 increased respiration and increased rapidity of circulation1 are instrumental to an extra genesis of force1 that counter-balances the extra dissipation of force4 ,this unusual transformation of molecular motion into sensible motion1 is presently followed by an unusual absorption of food--the source of molecular motion2 and in proportion as there has been a prolonged draft upon the spare capital of the system1 is there a tendency to a prolonged rest1 during which that spare capital is replaced4 ,if the deviation from the ordinary course of the functions has been so great as to derange them1 as when violent exertion produces loss of appetite and loss of sleep1 an equilibration is still eventually effected4 ,providing the disturbance is not such as to overturn the balance of the functions1 and destroy life 7in which case a complete equilibration is suddenly effected71 the ordinary balance is by and by re-established3 the returning appetite is keen in proportion as the waste has been large2 while sleep1 sound and prolonged1 makes up for previous wakefulness4 ,not even in those extreme cases where some excess has wrought a derangement that is never wholly rectified1 is there an exception to the general law2 for in such cases the cycle of the functions is1 after a time1 equilibrated about a new mean state1 which thenceforth becomes the normal state of the individual4 ,thus1 among the involved rhythmical changes constituting organic life1 any disturbing force that works an excess of change in some direction1 is gradually diminished and finally neutralized by antagonistic forces2 which thereupon work a compensating change in the opposite direction1 and so1 after more or less of oscillation1 restore the medium condition4 ,and this process it is1 which constitutes what physicians call the vis medicatrix natur4 ,the third form of equilibration displayed by organic bodies1 is a necessary sequence of that just illustrated4 ,when through a change of habit or circumstance1 an organism is permanently subject to some new influence1 or different amount of an old influence1 there arises1 after more or less disturbance of the organic rhythms1 a balancing of them around the new average condition produced by this additional influence4 ,as temporary divergences of the organic rhythms are counteracted by temporary divergences of a reverse kind2 so there is an equilibration of their permanent divergences by the genesis of opposing divergences that are equally permanent4 ,if the quantity of motion to be habitually generated by a muscle1 becomes greater than before1 its nutrition becomes greater than before4 ,if the expenditure of the muscle bears to its nutrition1 a greater ratio than expenditure bears to nutrition in other parts of the system2 the excess of nutrition becomes such that the muscle grows4 ,and the cessation of its growth is the establishment of a balance between the daily waste and the daily repair--the daily expenditure of force1 and the amount of latent force daily added4 ,the like must manifestly be the case with all organic modifications consequent on change of climate or food4 ,this is a conclusion which we may safely draw without knowing the special re-arrangements that effect the equilibration4 ,if we see that a different mode of life is followed1 after a period of functional derangement1 by some altered condition of the system--if we see that this altered condition1 becoming by and by established1 continues without further change2 we have no alternative but to say1 that the new forces brought to bear on the system1 have been compensated by the opposing forces they have evoked4 ,and this is the interpretation of the process which we call adaptation4 ,finally1 each organism illustrates the law in the ensemble of its life4 ,at the outset it daily absorbs under the form of food1 an amount of force greater than it daily expends2 and the surplus is daily equilibrated by growth4 ,as maturity is approached1 this surplus diminishes2 and in the perfect organism1 the day's absorption of potential motion balances the day's expenditure of actual motion4 ,that is to say1 during adult life1 there is continuously exhibited an equilibration of the third order4 ,eventually1 the daily loss1 beginning to out-balance the daily gain1 there results a diminishing amount of functional action2 the organic rhythms extend less and less widely on each side of the medium state2 and there finally results that complete equilibration which we call death4 ,the ultimate structural state accompanying that ultimate functional state towards which an organism tends1 both individually and as a species1 may be deduced from one of the propositions set down in the opening section of this chapter4 ,we saw that the limit of heterogeneity is arrived at whenever the equilibration of any aggregate becomes complete--that the re-distribution of matter can continue so long only as there continues any motion unbalanced4 ,whence we found it to follow that the final structural arrangements1 must be such as will meet all the forces acting on the aggregate1 by equivalent antagonist forces4 ,what is the implication in the case of organic aggregates2 the equilibrium of which is a moving one8 ,we have seen that the maintenance of such a moving equilibrium1 requires the habitual genesis of internal forces corresponding in number1 directions1 and amounts to the external incident forces--as many inner functions1 single or combined1 as there are single or combined outer actions to be met4 ,but functions are the correlatives of organs2 amounts of functions are1 other things equal1 the correlatives of sizes of organs2 and combinations of functions the correlatives of connections of organs4 ,hence the structural complexity accompanying functional equilibration1 is definable as one in which there are as many specialized parts as are capable1 separately and jointly1 of counteracting the separate and joint forces amid which the organism exists4 ,and this is the limit of organic heterogeneity2 to which man has approached more nearly than any other creature4 ,groups of organisms display this universal tendency towards a balance very obviously4 ,in #if1 every species of plant and animal was shown to be perpetually undergoing a rhythmical variation in number--now from abundance of food and absence of enemies rising above its average2 and then by a consequent scarcity of food and abundance of enemies being depressed below its average4 ,and here we have to observe that there is thus maintained an equilibrium between the sum of those forces which result in the increase of each race1 and the sum of those forces which result in its decrease4 ,either limit of variation is a point at which the one set of forces1 before in excess of the other1 is counterbalanced by it4 ,and amid these oscillations produced by their conflict1 lies that average number of the species at which its expansive tendency is in equilibrium with surrounding repressive tendencies4 ,nor can it be questioned that this balancing of the preservative and destructive forces which we see going on in every race1 must necessarily go on4 ,since increase of number cannot but continue until increase of mortality stops it2 and decrease of number cannot but continue until it is either arrested by fertility or extinguishes the race entirely4 99 99 99 99 99 #acd4 ,the equilibrations of those nervous actions which constitute what we know as mental life1 may be classified in like manner with those which constitute what we distinguish as bodily life4 ,we may deal with them in the same order4 ,each pulse of nervous force from moment to moment generated1 7and it was shown in #ig that nervous currents are not continuous but rhythmical7 is met by counteracting forces2 in overcoming which it is dispersed and equilibrated4 ,when tracing out the correlation and equivalence of forces1 we saw that each sensation and emotion1 or rather such part of it as remains after the excitation of associated ideas and feelings1 is expended in working bodily changes--contractions of the involuntary muscles1 the voluntary muscles1 or both2 as also in a certain stimulation of secreting organs4 ,that the movements thus initiated are ever being brought to a close by the opposing forces they evoke1 was pointed out above2 and here it is to be observed that the like holds with the nervous changes thus initiated4 ,various facts prove that the arousing of a thought or feeling1 always involves the overcoming of a certain resistance3 instance the fact that where the association of mental states has not been frequent1 a sensible effort is needed to call up the one after the other2 instance the fact that during nervous prostration there is a comparative inability to think--the ideas will not follow one another with the habitual rapidity2 instance the converse fact that at times of unusual energy1 natural or artificial1 the friction of thought becomes relatively small1 and more numerous1 more remote1 or more difficult connections of ideas are formed4 ,that is to say1 the wave of nervous energy each instant generated1 propagates itself throughout body and brain1 along those channels which the conditions at the instant render lines of least resistance2 and spreading widely in proportion to its amount1 ends only when it is equilibrated by the resistances it everywhere meets4 ,if we contemplate mental actions us extending over hours and days1 we discover equilibrations analogous to those hourly and daily established among the bodily functions4 ,in the one case as in the other1 there are rhythms which exhibit a balancing of opposing forces at each extreme1 and the maintenance of a certain general balance4 ,this is seen in the daily alternation of mental activity and mental rest--the forces expended during the one being compensated by the forces acquired during the other4 ,it is also seen in the recurring rise and fall of each desire3 each desire reaching a certain intensity1 is equilibrated either by expenditure of the force it embodies1 in the desired actions1 or1 less completely1 in the imagination of such actions3 the process ending in that satiety1 or that comparative quiescence1 forming the opposite limit of the rhythm4 ,and it is further manifest under a two-fold form1 on occasions of intense joy or grief3 each paroxysm of passion1 expressing itself in vehement bodily actions1 presently reaches an extreme whence the counteracting forces produce a return to a condition of moderate excitement2 and the successive paroxysms finally diminishing in intensity1 end in a mental equilibrium either like that before existing1 or partially differing from it in its medium state4 ,but the species of mental equilibration to be more especially noted1 is that shown in the establishment of a correspondence between relations among our states of consciousness and relations in the external world4 ,each outer connection of phenomena which we are capable of perceiving1 generates1 through accumulated experiences1 an inner connection of mental states2 and the result towards which this process tends1 is the formation of a mental connection having a relative strength that answers to the relative constancy of the physical connection represented4 ,in conformity with the general law that motion pursues the line of least resistance1 and that1 other things equal1 a line once taken by motion is made a line that will be more readily pursued by future motion2 we have seen that the ease with which nervous impressions follow one another1 is1 other things equal1 great in proportion to the number of times they have been repeated together in experience4 ,hence1 corresponding to such an invariable relation as that between the resistance of an object and some extension possessed by it1 there arises an indissoluble connection in consciousness2 and this connection1 being as absolute internally as the answering one is externally1 undergoes no further change--the inner relation is in perfect equilibrium with the outer relation4 ,conversely1 it hence happens that to such uncertain relations of phenomena as that between clouds and rain1 there arise relations of ideas of a like uncertainty2 and if1 under given aspects of the sky1 the tendencies to infer fair or foul weather1 correspond to the frequencies with which fair or foul weather follow such aspects1 the accumulation of experiences has balanced the mental sequences and the physical sequences4 ,when it is remembered that between these extremes there are countless orders of external connections having different degrees of constancy1 and that during the evolution of intelligence there arise answering internal associations having different degrees of cohesion2 it will be seen that there is a progress towards equilibrium between the relations of thought and the relations of things4 ,this equilibration can end only when each relation of things has generated in us a relation of thought1 such that on the occurrence of the conditions1 the relation in thought arises as certainly as the relation in things4 ,supposing this state to be reached 7which however it can be only in infinite time7 experience will cease to produce any further mental evolution--there will have been reached a perfect correspondence between ideas and facts2 and the intellectual adaptation of man to his circumstances will be complete4 ,the like general truths are exhibited in the process moral of adaptation2 which is a continual approach to equilibrium between the emotions and the kinds of conduct necessitated by surrounding conditions4 ,the connections of feelings and actions1 are determined in the same way as the connections of ideas3 just as repeating the association of two ideas1 facilitates the excitement of the one by the other2 so does each discharge of feeling into action1 render the subsequent discharge of such feeling into such action more easy4 ,hence it happens that if an individual is placed permanently in conditions which demand more action of a special kind than has before been requisite1 or than is natural to him--if the pressure of the painful feelings which these conditions entail when disregarded1 impels him to perform this action to a greater extent--if by every more frequent or more lengthened performance of it under such pressure1 the resistance is somewhat diminished2 then1 clearly1 there is an advance towards a balance between the demand for this kind of action and the supply of it4 ,either in himself1 or in his descendants continuing to live under these conditions1 enforced repetition must eventually bring about a state in which this mode of directing the energies will be no more repugnant than the various other modes previously natural to the race4 ,hence the limit towards which emotional modification perpetually tends1 and to which it must approach indefinitely near 7though it can absolutely reach it only in infinite time7 is a combination of desires that correspond to all the different orders of activity which the circumstances of life call for--desires severally proportionate in strength to the needs for these orders of activity2 and severally satisfied by these orders of activity4 ,in what we distinguish as acquired habits1 and in the moral differences of races and nations produced by habits that are maintained through successive generations1 we have countless illustrations of this progressive adaptation2 which can cease only with the establishment of a complete equilibrium between constitution and conditions4 ,possibly some will fail to see how the equilibrations described in this section1 can be classed with those preceding them2 and will be inclined to say that what are here set down as facts1 are but analogies4 ,nevertheless such equilibrations are as truly physical as the rest4 ,to show this fully1 would require a more detailed analysis than can now be entered on4 ,for the present it must suffice to point out1 as before 7 #hb71 that what we know subjectively as states of consciousness1 are1 objectively1 modes of force2 that so much feeling is the correlate of so much motion2 that the performance of any bodily action is the transformation of a certain amount of feeling into its equivalent amount of motion2 that this bodily action is met by forces which it is expended in overcoming2 and that the necessity for the frequent repetition of this action1 implies the frequent recurrence of forces to be so overcome4 ,hence the existence in any individual of an emotional stimulus that is in equilibrium with certain external requirements1 is literally the habitual production of a certain specialized portion of nervous energy1 equivalent in amount to a certain order of external resistances that are habitually met4 ,and thus the ultimate state1 forming the limit towards which ,evolution carries us1 is one in which the kinds and quantities of mental energy daily generated and transformed into motions1 are equivalent to1 or in equilibrium with1 the various orders and degrees of surrounding forces which antagonize such motions4 99 99 99 99 99 #ace4 ,each society taken as a whole1 displays the process of equilibration in the continuous adjustment of its population to its means of subsistence4 ,a tribe of men living on wild animals and fruits1 is manifestly1 like every tribe of inferior creatures1 always oscillating about that average number which the locality can support4 ,though by artificial production1 and by successive improvements in artificial production1 a superior race continually alters the limit which external conditions put to population2 yet there is ever a checking of population at the temporary limit reached4 ,it is true that where the limit is being so rapidly changed as among ourselves1 there is no actual stoppage3 there is only a rhythmical variation in the rate of increase4 ,but in noting the causes of this rhythmical variation--in watching how1 during periods of abundance1 the proportion of marriages increases1 and how it decreases during periods of scarcity2 it will be seen that the expansive force produces unusual advance whenever the repressive force diminishes1 and vice vers2 and thus there is as near a balancing of the two as the changing conditions permit4 ,the internal actions constituting social functions1 exemplify the general principle no less clearly4 ,supply and demand are continually being adjusted throughout all industrial processes2 and this equilibration is interpretable in the same way as preceding ones4 ,the production and distribution of a commodity1 is the expression of a certain aggregate of forces causing special kinds and amounts of motion4 ,the price of this commodity1 is the measure of a certain other aggregate of forces expended by the labourer who purchases it1 in other kinds and amounts of motion4 ,and the variations of price represent a rhythmical balancing of these forces4 ,every rise or fall in the rate of interest1 or change in the value of a particular security1 implies a conflict of forces in which some1 becoming temporarily predominant1 cause a movement that is presently arrested or equilibrated by the increase of opposing forces2 and amid these daily and hourly oscillations1 lies a more slowly-varying medium1 into which the value ever tends to settle2 and would settle but for the constant addition of new influences4 ,as in the individual organism so in the social organism1 functional equilibrations generate structural equilibrations4 ,when on the workers in any trade there comes an increased demand1 and when in return for the increased supply1 there is given to them an amount of other commodities larger than was before habitual--when1 consequently1 the resistances overcome by them in sustaining life are less than the resistances overcome by other workers2 there results a flow of other workers into this trade4 ,this flow continues until the extra demand is met1 and the wages so far fall again1 that the total resistance overcome in obtaining a given amount of produce1 is as great in this newly-adopted occupation as in the occupations whence it drew recruits4 ,the occurrence of motion along lines of least resistance1 was before shown to necessitate the growth of population in those places where the labour required for self-maintenance is the smallest2 and here we further see that those engaged in any such advantageous locality1 or advantageous business1 must multiply till there arises an approximate balance between this locality or business and others accessible to the same citizens4 ,in determining the career of every youth1 we see an estimation by parents of the respective advantages offered by all that are available1 and a choice of the one which promises best2 and through the consequent influx into trades that are at the time most profitable1 and the withholding of recruits from over-stocked trades1 there is insured a general equipoise between the power of each social organ and the function it has to perform4 ,the various industrial actions and re-actions thus continually alternating1 constitute a dependent moving equilibrium like that which is maintained among the functions of an individual organism4 ,and this dependent moving equilibrium parallels those already contemplated1 in its tendency to become more complete4 ,during early stages of social evolution1 while yet the resources of the locality inhabited are unexplored1 and the arts of production undeveloped1 there is never anything more than a temporary and partial balancing of such actions1 under the form of acceleration or retardation of growth4 ,but when a society approaches the maturity of that type on which it is organized1 the various industrial activities settle down into a comparatively constant state4 ,moreover1 it is observable that advance in organization1 as well as advance in growth1 is conducive to a better equilibrium of industrial functions4 ,while the diffusion of mercantile information is slow1 and the means of transport deficient1 the adjustment of supply to demand is extremely imperfect3 great over-production of each commodity followed by great under-production1 constitute a rhythm having extremes that depart very widely from the mean state in which demand and supply are equilibrated4 ,but when good roads are made1 and there is a rapid diffusion of printed or written intelligence1 and still more when railways and telegraphs come into existence--when the periodical fairs of early days lapse into weekly markets1 and these into daily markets2 there is gradually produced a better balance of production and consumption4 ,extra demand is much more quickly followed by augmented supply2 and the rapid oscillations of price within narrow limits on either side of a comparatively uniform mean1 indicate a near approach to equilibrium4 ,evidently this industrial progress has for its limit1 that which ,mr4 ,mill has called 8the stationary state40 ,when population shall have become dense over all habitable parts of the globe2 when the resources of every region have been fully explored2 and when the productive arts admit of no further improvements2 there must result an almost complete balance1 both between the fertility and mortality of each society1 and between its producing and consuming activities4 ,each society will exhibit only minor deviations from its average number1 and the rhythm of its industrial functions will go on from day to day and year to year with comparatively insignificant perturbations4 ,this limit1 however1 though we are inevitably advancing towards it1 is indefinitely remote2 and can never indeed be absolutely reached4 ,the peopling of the ,earth up to the point supposed1 cannot take place by simple spreading4 ,in the future1 as in the past1 the process will be carried on rhythmically1 by waves of emigration from new and higher centres of civilization successively arising2 and by the supplanting of inferior races by the superior races they beget2 and the process so carried on must be extremely slow4 ,nor does it seem to me that such an equilibration will1 as ,mr4 ,mill suggests1 leave scope for further mental culture and moral progress2 but rather that the approximation to it must be simultaneous with the approximation to complete equilibrium between man's nature and the conditions of his existence4 ,one other kind of social equilibration has still to be considered3--that which results in the establishment of governmental institutions1 and which becomes complete as these institutions fall into harmony with the desires of the people4 ,there is a demand and supply in political affairs as in industrial affairs2 and in the one case as in the other1 the antagonist forces produce a rhythm which1 at first extreme in its oscillations1 slowly settles down into a moving equilibrium of comparative regularity4 ,those aggressive impulses inherited from the pre-social state--those tendencies to seek self-satisfaction regardless of injury to other beings1 which are essential to a predatory life1 constitute an anti-social force1 tending ever to cause conflict and eventual separation of citizens4 ,contrariwise1 those desires whose ends can be achieved only by union1 as well as those sentiments which find satisfaction through intercourse with fellow-men1 and those resulting in what we call loyalty1 are forces tending to keep the units of a society together4 ,on the one hand1 there is in each citizen1 more or less of resistance against all restraints imposed on his actions by other citizens3 a resistance which1 tending continually to widen each individual's sphere of action1 and reciprocally to limit the spheres of action of other individuals1 constitutes a repulsive force mutually exercised by the members of a social aggregate4 ,on the other hand1 the general sympathy of man for man1 and the more special sympathy of each variety of man for others of the same variety1 together with sundry allied feelings which the social state gratifies1 act as an attractive force1 tending ever to keep united those who have a common ancestry4 ,and since the resistances to be overcome in satisfying the totality of their desires when living separately1 are greater than the resistances to be overcome in satisfying the totality of their desires when living together1 there is a residuary force that prevents their separation4 ,like all other opposing forces1 those exerted by citizens on each other1 are ever producing alternating movements1 which1 at first extreme1 undergo a gradual diminution on the way to ultimate equilibrium4 ,in small1 undeveloped societies1 marked rhythms result from these conflicting tendencies4 ,a tribe whose members have held together for a generation or two1 reaches a size at which it will not hold together2 and on the occurrence of some event causing unusual antagonism among its members1 divides4 ,each primitive nation1 depending largely for its continued union on the character of its chief1 exhibits wide oscillations between an extreme in which the subjects are under rigid restraint1 and an extreme in which the restraint is not enough to prevent disorder4 ,in more advanced nations of like type1 we always find violent actions and reactions of the same essential nature--8despotism tempered by assassination10 characterizing a political state in which unbearable repression from time to time brings about a bursting of all bonds4 ,in this familiar fact1 that a period of tyranny is followed by a period of license and vice vers1 we see how these opposing forces are ever equilibrating each other2 and we also see1 in the tendency of such movements and counter-movements to become more moderate1 how the equilibration progresses towards completeness4 ,the conflicts between ,conservatism 7which stands for the restraints of society over the individual7 and ,reform 7which stands for the liberty of the individual against society71 fall within slowly approximating limits2 so that the temporary predominance of either1 produces a less marked deviation from the medium state4 ,this process1 now so far advanced among ourselves that the oscillations are comparatively unobtrusive1 must go on till the balance between the antagonist forces approaches indefinitely near perfection4 ,for1 as we have already seen1 the adaptation of man's nature to the conditions of his existence1 cannot cease until the internal forces which we know as feelings are in equilibrium with the external forces they encounter4 ,and the establishment of this equilibrium1 is the arrival at a state of human nature and social organization1 such that the individual has no desires but those which may be satisfied without exceeding his proper sphere of action1 while society maintains no restraints but those which the individual voluntarily respects4 ,the progressive extension of the liberty of citizens1 and the reciprocal removal of political restrictions1 are the steps by which we advance towards this state4 ,and the ultimate abolition of all limits to the freedom of each1 save those imposed by the like freedom of all1 must result from the complete equilibration between man's desires and the conduct necessitated by surrounding conditions4 ,of course in this case1 as in the preceding ones1 there is thus involved a limit to the increase of heterogeneity4 ,a few pages back1 we reached the conclusion that each advance in mental evolution1 is the establishment of some further internal action1 corresponding to some further external action--some additional connection of ideas or feelings1 answering to some before unknown or unantagonized connection of phenomena4 ,we inferred that each such new function1 involving some new modification of structure1 implies an increase of heterogeneity2 and that thus1 increase of heterogeneity must go on1 while there remain any outer relations affecting the organism which are unbalanced by inner relations4 ,whence we saw it to follow that increase of heterogeneity can come to an end only as equilibration is completed4 ,evidently the like must simultaneously take place with society4 ,each increment of heterogeneity in the individual1 must directly or indirectly involve1 as cause or consequence1 some increment of heterogeneity in the arrangements of the aggregate of individuals4 ,and the limit to social complexity can be arrived at1 only with the establishment of the equilibrium1 just described1 between social and individual forces4 99 99 99 99 99 #acf4 ,here presents itself a final question1 which has probably been taking a more or less distinct shape in the minds of many1 while reading this chapter4 8,if ,evolution of every kind1 is an increase in complexity of structure and function that is incidental to the universal process of equilibration--if equilibration1 passing through the gradually-perfected forms of moving equilibrium1 must end in complete rest2 what is the fate towards which all things tend8 ,if the bodies constituting our ,solar ,system are slowly dissipating the forces they possess--if the ,sun is losing his heat at a rate which1 though insignificant as stated in terms of our chronology1 will tell in millions of years--if geologic and meteorologic processes cannot but diminish in activity as the ,sun's radiations diminish--if with the diminution of these radiations there must also go on a diminution in the quantity of vegetal and animal existence--if ,man and ,society1 however high the degree of evolution at which they arrive1 are similarly dependent on this supply of force that is gradually coming to an end--if thus the highest1 equally with the lowest1 terrestrial life1 must eventually dwindle and disappear2 are we not manifestly progressing towards omnipresent death8 ,and have we thus to contemplate1 as the out-come of things1 a universe of extinct suns round which circle planets devoid of life80 ,that such a state must be the proximate end of the processes everywhere going on1 seems beyond doubt4 ,but the further question tacitly involved1 whether this state will continue eternally1 is quite a different one4 ,to give a positive answer to this further question would be quite illegitimate2 since to affirm any proposition into which unlimited time enters as one of the terms1 is to affirm a proposition of which one term cannot be represented in consciousness--is to affirm an unthinkable proposition4 ,at a first glance it may appear that the reverse conclusion must be equally illegitimate2 and that so the question is altogether insoluble4 ,but further consideration will show that this is not true4 ,so long as the terms to which we confine our reasonings are finite1 the finite conclusions reached are not necessarily illegitimate4 ,though1 if the general argument1 when carried out1 left no apparent escape from the inference that the state of rest to which ,evolution is carrying things1 must1 when arrived at1 last for ever1 this inference would be invalid1 as transcending the scope of human intelligence2 yet if1 on pushing further the general argument1 we bring out the inference that such a state will not last for ever1 this inference is not necessarily invalid3 since1 by the hypothesis1 it contains no terms necessarily transcending the scope of human intelligence4 ,it is permissible therefore1 to inquire1 what are the probable ulterior results of this process which must bring ,evolution to a close in ,universal ,death4 ,without being so rash as to form anything like a positive conclusion on a matter so vast and so far beyond the boundaries of exact science2 we may still inquire what seems to be the remote future towards which the facts point4 ,it has been already shown that all equilibration1 so far as we can trace it1 is relative4 ,the dissipation of a body's motion by communication of it to surrounding matter1 solid1 liquid1 gaseous1 and ethereal1 tends to bring the body to a fixed position in relation to the matter that abstracts its motion4 ,but all its other motions continue as before4 ,the arrest of a cannon-shot does not diminish its movement towards the ,east at a thousand miles an hour1 along with the wall it has struck2 and a gradual dispersion of the ,earth's rotatory motion1 would abstract nothing from the million and a half miles per day through which the ,earth speeds in its orbit4 ,further1 we have to bear in mind that this motion1 the disappearance of which causes relative equilibration1 is not lost but simply transferred2 and by continual division and subdivision finally reduced to ethereal undulations and radiated through space4 ,whether the sensible motion dissipated during relative equilibration1 is directly transformed into insensible motion1 as happens in the case of the ,sun2 or whether1 as in the sensible motions going on around us1 it is directly transformed into smaller sensible motions1 and these into still smaller1 until they become insensible1 matters not4 ,in every instance the ultimate result is1 that whatever motion of masses is lost1 re-appears as molecular motion pervading space4 ,thus the questions we have to consider1 are--,whether after the completion of all the relative equilibrations above contemplated as bringing ,evolution to a close1 there remain any further equilibrations to be effected8--,whether there are any other motions of masses that must eventually be transformed into molecular motion8--,and if there are such other motions1 what must be the consequence when the molecular motion generated by their transformation1 is added to that which already exists8 ,to the first of these questions the answer is1 that there do remain motions which are undiminished by all the relative equilibrations thus far considered2 namely1 the motions of translation possessed by those vast masses of incandescent matter called stars--masses now known to be suns that are in all probability1 like our own1 surrounded by circling groups of planets4 ,the belief that the stars are literally fixed1 has long since been exploded3 observation has proved many of them to have sensible proper motions4 ,moreover1 it has been ascertained by measurement1 that in relation to the stars nearest to us1 our own star is moving at the rate of about half a million miles per day2 and if1 as is admitted to be not improbable by sundry astronomers1 our own star is traversing space in the same direction with adjacent stars1 its absolute velocity may be1 and most likely is1 immensely greater than this4 ,now no such changes as those taking place within the ,solar ,system1 even when carried to the extent of integrating the whole of its matter into one mass1 and diffusing all its relative movements in an insensible form through space1 can affect these sidereal movements4 ,hence1 there appears no alternative but to infer1 that these sidereal movements must remain to be equilibrated by some subsequent process4 ,the next question that arises1 if we venture to inquire the probable nature of this process1 is--,to what law do sidereal motions conform8 ,and to this question ,astronomy replies--the law of gravitation4 ,the relative motions of binary stars have proved this4 ,when it was discovered that certain of the double stars are not optically double but physically double1 and move round each other1 it was at once suspected that their revolutions might be regulated by a mutual attraction like that which regulates the revolutions of planets and satellites4 ,the requisite measurements having been from time to time made1 the periodic times of sundry binary stars were calculated on this assumption2 and the subsequent performances of their revolutions in the predicted periods1 have completely verified the assumption4 ,if1 then1 it is demonstrated that these remote bodies are centres of gravitation--if we infer that all other stars are centres of gravitation1 as we may fairly do--and if we draw the unavoidable corollary1 that this gravitative force which so conspicuously affects stars that are comparatively near each other1 must affect remote stars2 we find ourselves led to the conclusion that all the members of our ,sidereal ,system gravitate1 individually and as an aggregate4 ,but if these widely-dispersed moving masses mutually gravitate1 what must happen8 ,there appears but one tenable answer4 ,even supposing they were all absolutely equal in weight1 and arranged into an annulus with absolute regularity1 and endowed with exactly the amounts of centrifugal force required to prevent nearer approach to their common centre of gravity2 the condition would still be one which the slightest disturbing force would destroy4 ,much more then are we driven to the inference1 that our actual ,sidereal ,system cannot preserve its present arrangement3 the irregularities of its distribution being such as to render even a temporary moving equilibrium impossible4 ,if the stars are so many centres of an attractive force that varies inversely as the square of the distance1 there appears to be no escape from the conclusion1 that the structure of our galaxy must be undergoing change2 and must continue to undergo change4 ,thus1 in the absence of tenable alternatives1 we are brought to the positions3--#a1 that the stars are in motion2--#b1 that they move in conformity with the law of gravitation2--#c1 that1 distributed as they are1 they cannot move in conformity with the law of gravitation1 without undergoing change of arrangement4 ,if now we permit ourselves to take a further step1 and ask the nature of this change of arrangement1 we find ourselves obliged to infer a progressive concentration4 ,whether we do or do not suppose the clustering which is now visible1 to have been caused by mutual gravitation acting throughout past eras1 as the hypothesis of ,evolution implies1 we are equally compelled to conclude that this clustering must increase throughout future eras4 ,stars at present dispersed1 must become locally aggregated2 existing aggregations1 at the same time that they are enlarged by the drawing in of adjacent stars1 must grow more dense2 and aggregations must coalesce with each other3 each greater degree of concentration augmenting the force by which further concentration is produced4 ,and now what must be the limit of this concentration8 ,the mutual attraction of two individual stars1 when it so far predominates over other attractions as to cause approximation1 almost certainly ends in the formation of a binary star2 since the motions generated by other attractions1 prevent the two stars from moving in straight lines to their common centre of gravity4 ,between small clusters1 too1 having also certain proper motions as clusters1 mutual attraction may lead1 not to complete union1 but to the formation of binary clusters4 ,as the process continues however1 and the clusters become larger1 it seems clear that they must move more directly towards each other1 thus forming clusters of increasing density2 and that eventually all clusters must unite into one comparatively close aggregation4 ,while1 therefore1 during the earlier stages of concentration1 the probabilities are immense against the actual contact of these mutually-gravitating masses2 it is tolerably manifest1 that as the concentration increases1 collision must become probable1 and ultimately certain4 ,this is an inference not lacking the support of high authority4 ,sir ,john ,herschel1 treating of those numerous and variously-aggregated clusters of stars revealed by the telescope1 and citing with apparent approval his father's opinion1 that the more diffused and irregular of these1 are 8globular clusters in a less advanced state of condensation20 subsequently remarks1 that 8among a crowd of solid bodies of whatever size1 animated by independent and partially opposing impulses1 motions opposite to each other must produce collision1 destruction of velocity1 and subsidence or near approach towards the centre of preponderant attraction2 while those which conspire1 or which remain outstanding after such conflicts1 must ultimately give rise to circulation of a permanent character40 ,now what is here alleged of these minor sidereal aggregations1 cannot be denied of the large aggregations2 and thus the above-described process of concentration1 appears certain to bring about an increasingly-frequent integration of masses4 ,we have next to consider the consequences of the accompanying loss of velocity4 ,the sensible motion which disappears1 cannot be destroyed2 but must be transformed into insensible motion4 ,what will be the effect of this insensible motion8 ,some approach to a conception of it1 will be made by considering what would happen were the comparatively insignificant motion of our planet thus transformed4 ,in his essay on 8,the ,inter-action of ,natural ,forces10 ,prof4 ,helmholtz states the thermal equivalent of the ,earth's movement through space2 as calculated on the now received datum of ,mr4 ,joule4 8,if our ,earth10 he says1 8were by a sudden shock brought to rest in her orbit1--which is not to be feared in the existing arrangement of our system--by such a shock a quantity of heat would be generated equal to that produced by the combustion of fourteen such ,earths of solid coal4 ,making the most unfavourable assumption as to its capacity for heat1 that is1 placing it equal to that of water1 the mass of the ,earth would thereby be heated #aa1bjj degrees2 it would therefore be quite fused1 and for the most part reduced to vapour4 ,if then the ,earth1 after having been thus brought to rest1 should fall into the ,sun1 which of course would be the case1 the quantity of heat developed by the shock would be #djj times greater40 ,now so relatively small a momentum as that acquired by the ,earth in falling through #ie1jjj1jjj of miles to the ,sun1 being equivalent to a molecular motion such as would reduce the ,earth to gases of extreme rarity2 what must be the molecular motion generated by the mutually-arrested momenta of two stars1 that have moved to their common centre of gravity through spaces immeasurably greater8 ,there seems no alternative but to conclude1 that this molecular motion must be so great1 as to reduce the matter of the stars to an almost inconceivable tenuity--a tenuity like that which we ascribe to nebular matter4 ,such being the immediate effect of the integration of any two stars in a concentrating aggregate1 what must be the ulterior effect on the aggregate as a whole8 ,sir ,john ,herschel1 in the passage above quoted1 describing the collisions that must arise in a mutually-gravitating group of stars1 adds that those stars 8which remain outstanding after such conflicts1 must ultimately give rise to circulation of a permanent character40 ,the problem1 however1 is here dealt with purely as a mechanical one3 the assumption being1 that the mutually-arrested masses will continue as masses--an assumption to which no objection was apparent at the time when ,sir ,john ,herschel wrote this passage2 since the doctrine of the correlation of forces was not then recognized4 ,but obliged as we now are to conclude1 that stars moving at the high velocities acquired during concentration1 will1 by mutual arrest1 be dissipated into gases of great tenuity1 the problem becomes different2 and a different inference appears unavoidable4 ,for the diffused matter produced by such conflicts1 must form a resisting medium1 occupying that central region of the aggregate through which its members from time to time pass in describing their orbits--a resisting medium which they cannot move through without having their velocities diminished4 ,every further such collision1 by augmenting this resisting medium1 and making the losses of velocity greater1 must further aid in preventing the establishment of that equilibrium which would else arise2 and so must conspire to produce more frequent collisions4 ,and the nebulous matter thus formed1 presently enveloping and extending beyond the whole aggregate1 must1 by continuing to shorten their gyrations1 entail an increasingly-active integration and re-active disintegration of the moving masses2 until they are all finally dissipated4 ,this1 indeed1 is the conclusion which1 leaving out all consideration of the process gone through1 presents itself as a simple deduction from the persistence of force4 ,if the stars have been1 and still are1 concentrating however indirectly on their common centre of gravity1 and must eventually reach it2 it is a corollary from the persistence of force1 that the quantities of motion they have severally acquired1 must suffice to carry them away from the common centre of gravity to those remote regions whence they originally began to move towards it4 ,and since1 by the conditions of the case1 they cannot return to these remote regions in the shape of concrete masses1 they must return in the shape of diffused masses4 ,action and reaction being equal and opposite1 the momentum producing dispersion1 must be as great as the momentum acquired by aggregation2 and being spread over the same quantity of matter1 must cause an equivalent distribution through space1 whatever be the form of the matter4 ,one condition1 however1 essential to the literal fulfilment of this result1 must be specified2 namely1 that the quantity of molecular motion produced and radiated into space by each star in the course of its formation from diffused matter1 shall be compensated by an equal quantity of molecular motion radiated from other parts of space into the space which our ,sidereal ,system occupies4 ,in other words1 if we set out with that amount of molecular motion implied by the existence of the matter of our ,sidereal ,system in a nebulous form2 then it follows from the persistence of force1 that if this matter undergoes the re-distribution constituting ,evolution1 the quantity of molecular motion given out during the integration of each mass1 plus the quantity of molecular motion given out during the integration of all the masses1 must suffice again to reduce it to the same nebulous form4 ,here indeed we arrive at an impassable limit to our reasonings2 since we cannot know whether this condition is or is not fulfilled4 ,on the hypothesis of an unlimited space1 containing1 at certain intervals1 ,sidereal ,systems like our own1 it may be that the quantity of molecular motion radiated into the region occupied by our ,sidereal ,system1 is equal to that which our ,sidereal ,system radiates2 in which case the quantity of motion possessed by it1 remaining undiminished1 our ,sidereal ,system may continue during unlimited time1 to repeat this alternate concentration and diffusion4 ,but if1 on the other hand1 throughout boundless space there exist no other ,sidereal ,systems subject to like changes1 or if such other ,sidereal ,systems exist at more than a certain average distance from each other2 then it seems an unavoidable conclusion that the quantity of motion possessed1 must diminish by radiation into unoccupied space2 and that so1 on each successive resumption of the nebulous form1 the matter of our ,sidereal ,system will occupy a less space2 until at the end of an infinite time it reaches either a state in which its concentrations and diffusions are relatively small1 or a state of complete aggregation and rest4 ,since1 however1 we have no evidence showing the existence or non-existence of ,sidereal ,systems throughout remote space2 and since1 even had we such evidence1 a legitimate conclusion could not be drawn from premises of which one element 7unlimited space7 is inconceivable2 we must be for ever without answer to this transcendent question4 ,all we can say is1 that so far as the data enable us to judge1 the integration of our ,sidereal ,system will be followed by disintegration2 that such integration and disintegration will be repeated2 and that1 for anything we know to the contrary1 the alternation of them may continue without limit4 ,but leaving this ultimate insoluble problem1 and confining ourselves to the proximate and not necessarily insoluble one1 we find reason for thinking that after the completion of those various equilibrations which bring to a close all the forms of ,evolution we have contemplated1 there must still continue an equilibration of a far wider kind4 ,when that integration everywhere in progress throughout our ,solar ,system1 has reached its climax1 there will remain to be effected the immeasurably greater integration of our ,solar ,system1 with all other such systems4 ,as in those minor forms now going on around us1 this integration with its concomitant equilibration1 involves the change of aggregate motion into diffused motion2 so in those vaster forms hereafter to be carried out1 there must similarly be gained in molecular motion what is lost in the motion of masses2 and the inevitable transformation of this motion of masses into molecular motion1 cannot take place without reducing the masses to a nebulous form4 ,thus we seem led to the conclusion that the entire process of things1 as displayed in the aggregate of the visible ,universe1 is analogous to the entire process of things as displayed in the smallest aggregates4 ,where1 as in organic bodies1 the whole series of changes constituting ,evolution can be traced1 we saw that1 dynamically considered1 ,evolution is a change from molecular motion to the motion of masses2 and this change1 becoming more active during the ascending phase of ,evolution while the masses increase in bulk and heterogeneity1 eventually begins to get less active2 until1 passing through stages in which the integration grows greater1 and the equilibrium more definite1 it finally ceases2 whereupon there arises1 by an ulterior process1 an increase of molecular motion1 ending in the more or less complete dissolution of the aggregate4 ,and here we find reason to believe that1 along with each of the thousands of similar ones dispersed through the heavens1 our ,solar ,system1 after passing through stages during which the motion of masses is produced at the expense of lost molecular motion1 and during which there goes on an increasingly active differentiation and integration1 arrives at a climax whence these changes1 beginning to decline in activity1 slowly bring about that complete integration and equilibration which in other cases we call death2 and that there afterwards comes a time1 when the still-remaining motions of masses are transformed into a molecular motion which causes dissolution of the masses4 ,motion as well as ,matter being fixed in quantity1 it would seem that the change in the distribution of ,matter which ,motion effects1 coming to a limit in whichever direction it is carried1 the indestructible ,motion thereupon necessitates a reverse distribution4 ,apparently1 the universally-coexistent forces of attraction and repulsion1 which1 as we have seen1 necessitate rhythm in all minor changes throughout the ,universe1 also necessitate rhythm in the totality of its changes--produce now an immeasurable period during which the attractive forces predominating1 cause universal concentration1 and then an immeasurable period during which the repulsive forces predominating1 cause universal diffusion--alternate eras of ,evolution and ,dissolution4 ,and thus there is suggested the conception of a past during which there have been successive ,evolutions similar to that which is now going on2 and a future during which successive other such ,evolutions may go on4 ,let none suppose1 however1 that this is to be taken as anything more than a speculation4 ,in dealing with times and spaces and forces so immensely transcending those of which we have definite experience1 we are in danger of passing the limits to human intelligence4 ,though these times and spaces and forces cannot literally be classed as infinite2 yet they are so utterly beyond the possibility of definite conception1 as to be almost equally unthinkable with the infinite4 ,what has been above said1 should therefore be regarded simply as a possible answer to a possible doubt4 ,when1 pushing to its extreme the argument that ,evolution must come to a close in complete equilibrium or rest1 the reader suggests that for aught which appears to the contrary1 the ,universal ,death thus implied will continue indefinitely2 it is legitimate to point out how1 on carrying the argument still further1 we are led to infer a subsequent ,universal ,life4 ,but while this last inference may fitly be accepted as a demurrer to the first1 it would be unwise to accept it in any more positive sense4 99 99 99 99 99 #acg4 ,returning from this parenthetical discussion1 concerning the probable or possible state of things that may arise after ,evolution has run its course2 and confining ourselves to the changes constituting ,evolution1 with which alone we are immediately concerned2 we have now to inquire whether the cessation of these changes1 in common with all their transitional characteristics1 admits of priori proof4 ,it will soon become apparent that equilibration1 not less than the preceding general principles1 is deducible from the persistence of force4 ,we have seen 7 #he7 that phenomena are interpretable only as the results of universally-coexistent forces of attraction and repulsion4 ,these universally-coexistent forces of attraction and repulsion1 are1 indeed1 the complementary aspects of that absolutely persistent force which is the ultimate datum of consciousness4 ,just in the same way that the equality of action and re-action is a corollary from the persistence of force1 since their inequality would imply the disappearance of the differential force into nothing1 or its appearance out of nothing2 so1 we cannot become conscious of an attractive force without becoming simultaneously conscious of an equal and opposite repulsive force4 ,for every experience of a muscular tension1 7under which form alone we can immediately know an attractive force17 presupposes an equivalent resistance--a resistance shown in the counter-balancing pressure of the body against neighbouring objects1 or in that absorption of force which gives motion to the body1 or in both--a resistance which we cannot conceive as other than equal to the tension1 without conceiving force to have either appeared or disappeared1 and so denying the persistence of force4 ,and from this necessary correlation1 results our inability1 before pointed out1 of interpreting any phenomena save in terms of these correlatives--an inability shown alike in the compulsion we are under to think of the statical forces which tangible matter displays1 as due to the attraction and repulsion of its atoms1 and in the compulsion we are under to think of dynamical forces exercised through space1 by regarding space as filled with atoms similarly endowed4 ,thus from the existence of a force that is for ever unchangeable in quantity1 there follows1 as a necessary corollary1 the co-extensive existence of these opposite forms of force--forms under which the conditions of our consciousness oblige us to represent that absolute force which transcends our knowledge4 ,but the forces of attraction and repulsion being universally co-existent1 it follows1 as before shown1 that all motion is motion under resistance4 ,units of matter1 solid1 liquid1 ariform1 or ethereal1 filling the space which any moving body traverses1 offer to such body the resistance consequent on their cohesion1 or their inertia1 or both4 ,in other words1 the denser or rarer medium which occupies the places from moment to moment passed through by such moving body1 having to be expelled from them1 as much motion is abstracted from the moving body as is given to the medium in expelling it from these places4 ,this being the condition under which all motion occurs1 two corollaries result4 ,the first is1 that the deductions perpetually made by the communication of motion to the resisting medium1 cannot but bring the motion of the body to an end in a longer or shorter time4 ,the second is1 that the motion of the body cannot cease until these deductions destroy it4 ,in other words1 movement must continue till equilibration takes place2 and equilibration must eventually take place4 ,both these are manifest deductions from the persistence of force4 ,to say that the whole or part of a body's motion can disappear1 save by transfer to something which resists its motion1 is to say that the whole or part of its motion can disappear without effect2 which is to deny the persistence of force4 ,conversely1 to say that the medium traversed can be moved out of the body's path1 without deducting from the body's motion1 is to say that motion of the medium can arise out of nothing2 which is to deny the persistence of force4 ,hence this primordial truth is our immediate warrant for the conclusions1 that the changes which ,evolution presents1 cannot end until equilibrium is reached2 and that equilibrium must at last be reached4 ,equally necessary1 because equally deducible from this same truth that transcends proof1 are the foregoing propositions respecting the establishment and maintenance of moving equilibria1 under their several aspects4 ,it follows from the persistence of force1 that the various motions possessed by any aggregate1 either as a whole or among its parts1 must be severally dissipated by the resistances they severally encounter2 and that thus1 such of them as are least in amount1 or meet with greatest opposition1 or both1 will be brought to a close while the others continue4 ,hence in every diversely moving aggregate1 there results a comparatively early dissipation of motions which are smaller and much resisted2 followed by long-continuance of the larger and less-resisted motions2 and so there arise dependent and independent moving equilibria4 ,hence also may be inferred the tendency to conservation of such moving equilibria2 since1 whenever the new motion given to the parts of a moving equilibrium by a disturbing force1 is not of such kind and amount that it cannot be dissipated before the pre-existing motions 7in which case it brings the moving equilibrium to an end7 it must be of such kind and amount that it can be dissipated before the pre-existing motions 7in which case the moving equilibrium is re-established74 ,thus from the persistence of force follow1 not only the various direct and indirect equilibrations going on around1 together with that cosmical equilibration which brings ,evolution under all its forms to a close2 but also those less manifest equilibrations shown in the re-adjustments of moving equilibria that have been disturbed4 ,by this ultimate principle is proveable the tendency of every organism1 disordered by some unusual influence1 to return to a balanced state4 ,to it also may be traced the capacity1 possessed in a slight degree by individuals1 and in a greater degree by species1 of becoming adapted to new circumstances4 ,and not less does it afford a basis for the inference1 that there is a gradual advance towards harmony between man's mental nature and the conditions of his existence4 ,after finding that from it are deducible the various characteristics of ,evolution1 we finally draw from it a warrant for the belief1 that ,evolution can end only in the establishment of the greatest perfection and the most complete happiness4 ----- ,footnote #ah3 ,sir ,david ,brewster has recently been citing with approval1 a calculation by ,m4 ,babinet1 to the effect that on the hypothesis of nebular genesis1 the matter of the ,sun1 when it filled the ,earth's orbit1 must have taken #caha years to rotate2 and that therefore the hypothesis cannot be true4 ,this calculation of ,m4 ,babinet may pair-off with that of ,m4 ,comte1 who1 contrariwise1 made the time of this rotation agree very nearly with the ,earth's period of revolution round the ,sun2 for if ,m4 ,comte's calculation involved a petitio principii1 that of ,m4 ,babinet is manifestly based on two assumptions1 both of which are gratuitous1 and one of them totally inconsistent with the doctrine to be tested4 ,he has evidently proceeded on the current supposition respecting the ,sun's internal density1 which is not proved1 and from which there are reasons for dissenting2 and he has evidently taken for granted that all parts of the nebulous spheroid1 when it filled the ,earth's orbit1 had the same angular velocity2 whereas if 7as is implied in the nebular hypothesis1 rationally understood7 this spheroid resulted from the concentration of far more widely-diffused matter1 the angular velocity of its equatorial portion would obviously be immensely greater than that of its central portion4 ,footnote #ai3 ,see paper 8,on the ,inter-action of ,natural ,forces10 by ,prof4 ,helmholtz1 translated by ,prof4 ,tyndall1 and published in the ,philosophical ,magazine1 supplement to ,vol4 ,,xi4 fourth series4 ,footnote #bj3 ,until ,i recently consulted his 8,outlines of ,astronomy0 on another question1 ,i was not aware that so far back as #ahcc1 ,sir ,john ,herschel had enunciated the doctrine that 8the sun's rays are the ultimate source of almost every motion which takes place on the surface of the earth40 ,he expressly includes all geologic1 meteorologic1 and vital actions2 as also those which we produce by the combustion of coal4 ,the late ,george ,stephenson appears to have been wrongly credited with this last idea4 ,,chapter ,,xvii4 ,,summary ,,and ,,conclusion4 #ach4 ,in the chapter on 8,laws in general10 after delineating the progress of mankind in recognizing uniformities of relation among surrounding phenomena--after showing how the actual succession in the establishment of different orders of co-existences and sequences1 corresponds with the succession deducible priori from the conditions to human knowledge--after showing how1 by the ever-multiplying experiences of constant connections among phenomena1 there has been gradually generated the conception of universal conformity to law2 it was suggested that this conception will become still clearer1 when it is perceived that there are laws of wider generality than any of those at present accepted4 ,the existence of such more general laws1 is1 indeed1 almost implied by the ensemble of the facts set forth in the above-named chapter2 since they make it apparent1 that the process hitherto carried on1 of bringing phenomena under fewer and wider laws1 has not ceased1 but is advancing with increasing rapidity4 ,apart1 however1 from evidence of this kind1 the man of science1 hourly impressed with new proof of uniformity in the relations of things1 until the conception of uniformity has become with him a necessity of thought1 tacitly entertains the conclusion that the minor uniformities which ,science has thus far established1 will eventually be merged in uniformities that are universal4 ,taught as he is by every observation and experiment1 to regard phenomena as manifestations of ,force2 and learning as he does to contemplate ,force as unchangeable in amount2 there tends to grow up in him a belief in unchangeable laws common to ,force under all its manifestations4 ,though he may not have formulated it to himself1 he is prepared to recognize the truth1 that1 being fixed in quantity1 fixed in its two ultimate modes of presentation 7,matter and ,motion71 and fixed in the conditions under which it is presented 7,time and ,space72 ,force must have certain equally fixed laws of action1 common to all the changes it produces4 ,hence to the classes who alone are likely to read these pages1 the hypothesis of a fundamental unity1 extending from the simplest inorganic actions up to the most complex associations of thought and the most involved social processes1 will have an priori probability4 ,all things being recognized as having one source1 will be expected to exhibit one method4 ,even in the absence of a clue to uniformities co-extensive with all modes of ,force1 as the mathematical uniformities are co-extensive with ,space and ,time1 it will be inferred that such uniformities exist4 ,and thus a certain presumption will result in favour of any formula1 of a generality great enough to include concrete phenomena of every order4 99 99 99 99 99 #aci4 ,in the chapters on the 8,law of ,evolution10 there was set forth a principle1 which1 so far as accessible evidence enables us to judge1 possesses this universality4 ,the order of material changes1 first perceived to have certain constant characteristics in cases where it could be readily traced from beginning to end1 we found to have these same characteristics in cases where it could be less readily traced2 and we saw numerous indications that these same characteristics were displayed during past changes of which we have no direct knowledge4 ,the transformation of the homogeneous into the heterogeneous1 first observed by naturalists to be exhibited during the development of every plant and animal1 proved to be also exhibited during the development of every society2 both in its political and industrial organization1 and in all the products of social life1--language1 science1 art1 and literature4 ,from the disclosures of geology1 we drew adequate support for the conclusion1 that in the structure of the ,earth there has similarly been a progress from uniformity1 through ever-increasing degrees of multiformity1 to the complex state which we now see4 ,and on the assumption of that nebular origin to which so many facts point1 we inferred that a like transition from unity to variety of distribution1 must have been undergone by our ,solar ,system2 as well as by that vast assemblage of such systems constituting the visible ,universe4 ,this definition of the metamorphosis1 first asserted by physiologists of organic aggregates only1 but which we thus found reason to think1 holds of all other aggregates1 proved on further inquiry to be too wide4 ,its undue width was shown to arise from the omission of certain other characteristics1 that are1 not less than the foregoing one1 displayed throughout all kinds of ,evolution4 ,we saw that simultaneously with the change from homogeneity to heterogeneity1 there takes place a change from indefiniteness of arrangement to definiteness of arrangement--a change everywhere equally traceable with that which it accompanies4 ,further consideration made it apparent1 that the increasing definiteness thus manifested along with increasing heterogeneity1 necessarily results from increasing integration of the parts severally rendered unlike4 ,and thus we finally reached the conclusion1 that there has been going on throughout an immeasurable past1 is still going on1 and will continue to go on1 an advance from a diffused1 indeterminate1 and uniform distribution of ,matter1 to a concentrated1 determinate1 and multiform distribution of it4 ,at a subsequent stage of our inquiry1 we discovered that this progressive change in the arrangement of ,matter1 is accompanied by a parallel change in the arrangement of ,motion--that every increase in the structural complexity of things1 involves a corresponding increase in their functional complexity4 ,it was shown that along with the integration of molecules into masses1 there arises an integration of molecular motion into the motion of masses2 and that as fast as there results variety in the sizes and forms of aggregates and their relations to incident forces1 there also results variety in their movements4 ,whence it became manifest1 that the general process of things is from a confused simplicity to an orderly complexity1 in the distribution of both ,matter and ,motion4 ,it was pointed out1 however1 that though this species of transformation is universal1 in the sense of holding throughout all classes of phenomena1 it is not universal in the sense of being continued without limit in all classes of phenomena4 ,those aggregates which exhibit the entire change from uniformity to multiformity of structure and function1 in comparatively short periods1 eventually show us a reverse set of changes3 ,evolution is followed by ,dissolution4 ,the differentiations and integrations of ,matter and ,motion1 finally reach a degree which the conditions do not allow them to pass2 and there then sets in a process of disintegration and assimilation1 of both the parts and the movements that were before growing more united and more distinct4 ,but under one or the other of these processes1 all observable modifications in the arrangement of things may be classed4 ,every change comes under the head of integration or disintegration1 material or dynamical2 or under the head of differentiation or assimilation1 material or dynamical2 or under both4 ,each inorganic mass is either undergoing increase by the combination with it of surrounding elements for which its parts have affinity2 or undergoing decrease by the solvent and abraiding action of surrounding elements2 or both one and the other in varied succession and combination4 ,by perpetual additions and losses of heat1 it is having its parts temporarily differentiated from each other1 or temporarily assimilated to each other1 in molecular state4 ,and through the actions of divers agents1 it is also undergoing certain permanent molecular re-arrangements2 rendering it either more uniform or more multiform in structure4 ,these opposite kinds of change1 thus vaguely typified in every surrounding fragment of matter1 are displayed in all aggregates with increasing distinctness in proportion as the conditions essential to re-arrangement of parts are fulfilled4 ,so that universally1 the process of things is either in the one direction or the other4 ,there is in all cases going on that ever-complicating distribution of ,matter and ,motion which we call ,evolution2 save in those cases where it has been brought to a close and reversed by what we call ,dissolution4 99 99 99 99 99 #adj4 ,whether this omnipresent metamorphosis admits of interpretation1 was the inquiry on which we next entered4 ,recognizing the changes thus formulated as consisting in ,motions of ,matter that are produced by ,force1 we saw that if they are interpretable at all1 it must be by the affiliation of them on certain ultimate laws of ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force4 ,we therefore proceeded to inquire what these ultimate laws are4 ,we first contemplated under its leading aspects1 the principle of correlation and equivalence among forces4 ,the genesis of sensible motion by insensible motion1 and of insensible motion by sensible motion1 as well as the like reciprocal production of those forms of insensible motion which constitute ,light1 ,heat1 ,electricity1 ,magnetism1 and ,chemical ,action1 was shown to be a now accepted doctrine1 that involves certain corollaries respecting the processes everywhere going on around us4 ,setting out with the probability that the insensible motion radiated by the ,sun1 is the transformed product of the sensible motion lost during the progressive concentration of the solar mass2 we saw that by this insensible motion1 are in turn produced the various kinds of sensible motion on the ,earth's surface4 ,besides the inorganic terrestrial changes1 we found that the changes constituting organic life are thus originated4 ,we were obliged to conclude that within this category1 come the vital phenomena classed as mental1 as well as those classed as physical4 ,and it appeared inevitably to follow that of social changes1 too1 the like must be said4 ,we next saw that phenomena being cognizable by us only as products of ,force1 manifested under the two-fold form of attraction and repulsion1 there results the general law that all ,motion must occur in the direction of least resistance1 or in the direction of greatest traction1 or in the direction of their resultant4 ,it was pointed out that this law is every instant illustrated in the movements of the celestial bodies4 ,the innumerable transpositions of matter1 gaseous1 liquid1 and solid1 going on over the ,earth's surface1 were shown to conform to it4 ,evidence was given that this same ultimate principle of motion underlies the structural and functional changes of organisms4 ,throughout the succession of those nervous actions which constitute thought and feeling1 as also in the discharge of feeling into action1 we no less found this principle conspicuous4 ,nor did we discover any exception to it in the movements1 temporary and permanent1 that go on in societies4 ,from the universal coexistence of opposing forces1 there also resulted the rhythm of motion4 ,it was shown that this is displayed from the infinitesimal vibrations of molecules up to the enormous revolutions and gyrations of planets2 that it is traceable throughout all meteorologic and geologic changes2 that the functions of every organic body exemplify it in various forms2 that mental activities too1 intellectual and emotional1 exhibit periodicities of sundry kinds2 and that actions and reactions illustrating this law under a still more complex form1 pervade social processes4 ,such being the principles to which conform all changes produced by ,force on the distribution of ,matter1 and all changes re-actively produced by ,matter on the distribution of ,force1 we proceeded to inquire what must be the consequent nature of any re-distributions produced3 having first noted the limiting conditions between which such re-distributions are possible1 and the medium conditions that are most favourable to them4 ,the first conclusion arrived at1 was1 that any finite homogeneous aggregate must inevitably lose its homogeneity1 through the unequal exposure of its parts to incident forces4 ,we observed how this was shown in surrounding things1 by the habitual establishment of differences between inner and outer parts1 and parts otherwise dissimilarly circumstanced4 ,it was pointed out that the production of diversities of structure by forces acting under diverse conditions1 has been illustrated in astronomic evolution1 supposing such evolution to have taken place2 and that a like connection of cause and effect is seen in the large and small modifications undergone by our globe4 ,in the early changes of organic germs1 we discovered further evidence that unlikenesses of structure follow unlikenesses of relations to surrounding agencies--evidence enforced by the tendency of the differently-placed members of each species to diverge into varieties4 ,we found that the principle is also conformed to in the establishment of distinctions among our ideas2 and that the contrasts1 political and industrial1 that arise between the parts of societies are no less in harmony with it4 ,the instability of the homogeneous thus caused1 and thus everywhere exemplified1 we also saw must hold of the unlike parts into which any uniform whole lapses2 and that so the less heterogeneous must tend continually to become more heterogeneous--an inference which we also found to be everywhere confirmed by fact4 ,carrying a step further our inquiry into these actions and reactions between ,force and ,matter1 there was disclosed a secondary cause of increasing multiformity4 ,every differentiated part becomes1 we found1 a parent of further differentiations2 not only in the sense that it must lose its own homogeneity in heterogeneity1 but also in the sense that it must1 in growing unlike other parts1 become a centre of unlike reactions on incident forces2 and by so adding to the diversity of forces at work1 must add to the diversity of effects produced4 ,this multiplication of effects1 likewise proved to be manifest throughout all ,nature4 ,that forces modified in kind and direction by every part of every aggregate1 are gradually expended in working changes that grow more numerous and more varied as the forces are subdivided1 is shown in the actions and reactions going on throughout the ,solar ,system1 in the never-ceasing geologic complications1 in the involved symptoms produced in organisms by disturbing influences1 in the many thoughts and feelings generated by single impressions1 and in the ever-ramifying results of each new agency brought to bear on a society4 ,to which add the corollary1 confirmed by abundant facts1 that the multiplication of effects must increase in a geometrical progression1 as the heterogeneity increases4 ,completely to interpret the structural changes constituting ,evolution1 there remained to assign a reason for that increasingly-distinct demarcation of parts1 which accompanies the production of differences between parts4 ,this reason we discovered to be1 the segregation of mixed units under the action of forces capable of moving them4 ,we saw that when the parts of an aggregate have been made qualitatively unlike by unlike incident forces--that is1 when they have become contrasted in the natures of their component units2 there necessarily arises a tendency to separation of the dissimilar orders of units from each other1 and to aggregation of those units which are similar4 ,this cause of the integration that accompanies differentiation1 turned out to be likewise exemplified by all kinds of ,evolution--by the formation of celestial bodies1 by the moulding of the ,earth's crust1 by organic modifications1 by the establishment of mental distinctions1 by the genesis of social divisions4 ,and we inferred1 what we may everywhere see1 that the segregation thus produced goes on so long as there remains a possibility of making it more complete4 ,at length1 to the query whether the processes thus traced out have any limit1 there came the answer that they must end in equilibration4 ,that continual division and subdivision of forces1 which is instrumental in changing the uniform into the multiform and the multiform into the more multiform1 we saw to be at the same time a process by which force is perpetually dissipated2 and that dissipation1 continuing as long as there remains any force unbalanced by an opposing force1 must end in rest4 ,it was shown that when1 as happens with aggregates of various orders1 a number of movements are going on in combination1 the earlier dispersion of the smaller and more resisted movements1 entails the establishment of different kinds of moving equilibria3 forming transitional stages on the way to complete equilibrium4 ,and further inquiry made it apparent that for the same reason1 these moving equilibria have a certain self-conserving power2 shown in the neutralization of perturbations1 and the adjustment to new conditions4 ,this general principle1 like the preceding ones1 proved to be traceable throughout all forms of ,evolution--astronomic1 geologic1 biologic1 mental and social4 ,and our concluding inference was1 that the penultimate stage of this process1 in which the extremest degree of multiformity and completest form of moving equilibrium is established1 must be one implying the highest conceivable state of humanity4 ,thus it became apparent that this transformation of on indefinite1 incoherent homogeneity into a definite coherent heterogeneity1 which goes on everywhere1 until it brings about a reverse transformation1 is consequent on certain simple laws of force4 ,given those universal modes of action which are from moment to moment illustrated in the commonest changes around us1 and it follows that there cannot but result the observed metamorphosis of an indeterminate uniformity into a determinate multiformity4 99 99 99 99 99 #ada4 ,finally1 we have asked whether1 for these universal modes of action1 any common cause is assignable--whether these wide truths are dependent on any single widest truth4 ,and to this question we found a positive answer4 ,these several principles are corollaries from that primordial principle which transcends human intelligence by underlying it4 ,in the first part of this work it was shown1 by analysis of both our religious and our scientific ideas1 that while knowledge of the cause which produces effects on our consciousness is impossible1 the existence of a cause for these effects is a datum of consciousness4 ,though ,being is cognizable by us only under limits of ,time and ,space1 yet ,being without limits of ,time and ,space was proved to be the indefinite cognition forming the necessary basis of our definite cognitions4 ,we saw that the belief in an ,omnipresent ,power of which no commencement or cessation can be conceived1 is that fundamental element in ,religion which survives all its changes of form4 ,we saw that all ,philosophies avowedly or tacitly recognize this same ultimate truth3--that while the ,relativist rightly repudiates those definite assertions which the ,absolutist makes respecting real existence1 he is yet at last compelled to unite with him in predicating real existence4 ,and this inexpugnable consciousness in which ,religion and ,philosophy are at one with ,common ,sense1 proved to be likewise that on which all exact ,science is founded4 ,we found that subjective ,science can give no account of those conditioned modes of existence which constitute consciousness1 without postulating unconditioned existence4 ,and we found that objective ,science can give no account of the existence which we know as external1 without regarding its changes of form as manifestations of an existence that continues constant under all forms4 ,absolute ,being1 or ,being which persists without beginning or end1 was shown to be the common datum of all human thought2 for the sufficient reason that the consciousness of it cannot be suppressed1 without the suppression of consciousness itself4 ,from this truth which transcends proof1 we have seen that the general principles above set down1 are deducible4 ,that the power or force manifested to us in all phenomena1 continues unaltered in quantity1 however its mode of manifestation be altered1 is a proposition in which these several propositions are involved4 ,it was shown that on the ,persistence of ,force are based the demonstrations that ,matter is indestructible and ,motion continuous4 ,when its proofs were examined1 the correlation and equivalence of forces was found to follow from the ,persistence of ,force4 ,the necessity we are under of conceiving ,force under the two-fold form of attraction and repulsion1 turns out to be but an implication of the necessity we are under of conceiving ,force as persistent4 ,on the ,persistence of ,force1 we saw that the law of direction of ,motion is dependent2 and from it also we saw that the rhythm of ,motion necessarily results4 ,passing to those changes of distribution which1 by the ,motion it generates1 ,force produces in ,matter1 it was pointed out that from the ,persistence of ,force are severally deducible1 the instability of the homogeneous1 the multiplication of effects1 and that increasing definiteness of structure to which continuous differentiation and integration leads4 ,and lastly we saw that ,force being persistent1 ,evolution cannot cease until equilibrium is reached2 and that equilibrium must eventually be reached4 ,so that given ,force manifested in ,time and ,space1 under the forms of ,matter and ,motion2 and it is demonstrable1 priori1 that there must go on such transformations as we find going on4 99 99 99 99 99 #adb4 ,see then the accumulation of proofs4 ,the advance of human intelligence in establishing laws continually wider in generality1 raises the presumption that there are all-comprehensive laws4 ,turning to the facts1 we discern a pervading uniformity in the general course of things where this can be watched1 and indications of such uniformity where it cannot be watched4 ,considering this uniformity analytically1 we find it to result from certain simpler uniformities in the actions of ,force4 ,and these uniformities prove to be so many necessary implications of that primordial truth which underlies all knowledge--the ,persistence of ,force4 ,the aspect of things raises a presumption2 extended observations lead to an induction that fulfils this presumption2 this induction is deductively confirmed2 and the laws whence it is deduced are corollaries from that datum without which thought is impossible4 ,no higher degree of verification than this can be imagined4 ,an induction based on facts so numerous and varied1 and falling short of universality only where the facts are beyond observation1 possesses of itself a validity greater than that of most scientific inductions4 ,when it is shown that the proposition thus arrived at posteriori1 may also be arrived at priori1 starting from certain simple laws of force2 it is raised to a level with those generalizations of concrete science which are accepted as proved4 ,and when these simple laws of force are affiliated upon that ultimate truth which transcends proof2 this dependent proposition takes rank with those propositions of abstract science which are our types of the greatest conceivable certainty4 ,let no one suppose that any such degree of certainty is alleged of the various minor propositions brought in illustration of the general argument4 ,such an assumption would be so manifestly absurd1 that it seems scarcely needful to disclaim it4 ,but the truth of the doctrine as a whole1 is unaffected by errors in the details of its presentation4 ,as the first principles of mathematics are not invalidated by mistakes made in working out particular equations2 so the first principles set forth in the foregoing pages1 do not stand or fall with each special statement made in them4 ,if it can be shown that the ,persistence of ,force is not a datum of consciousness2 or if it can be shown that the several laws of force above specified are not corollaries from it2 then1 indeed1 it will be shown that the theory of ,evolution has not the certainty here claimed for it4 ,but nothing short of this can invalidate the general conclusions arrived at4 99 99 99 99 99 #adc4 ,if these conclusions be accepted--if it be admitted that they inevitably follow from the truth transcending all others in authority--if it be agreed that the phenomena going on everywhere are parts of the general process of ,evolution1 save where they are parts of the reverse process of ,dissolution2 then it must be inferred that all phenomena receive their complete interpretation1 only when recognized as parts of these processes4 ,regarded from the point of view here reached1 each change that takes place1 is an incident in the course of the ever-complicating distribution of ,matter and ,motion1 except where it is an incident in the course of the reverse distribution2 and each such change is fully understood1 only when brought under those universal principles of change1 to which these transformations necessarily conform4 ,whence1 indeed1 it appears to be an unavoidable conclusion1 that the limit towards which ,science is advancing1 must be reached when these formul are made all-comprehensive4 ,manifestly1 the perfection of ,science1 is a state in which all phenomena are seen to be necessary implications of the ,persistence of ,force4 ,in such a state1 the dependence of each phenomenon on the ,persistence of ,force1 must be proved either directly or indirectly--either by showing that it is a corollary of the ,persistence of ,force1 or by showing that it is a corollary from some general proposition deduced from the ,persistence of ,force4 ,and since all phenomena are incidents in the re-distributions of ,matter and ,motion2 and since there are certain general principles1 deducible from the ,persistence of ,force1 to which all these re-distributions conform2 it seems inferrable that ultimately all phenomena1 where not classed as consequences of the ,persistence of ,force1 must be classed as consequences of these derivative principles4 99 99 99 99 99 #add4 ,of course this development of ,science into an organized aggregate of direct and indirect deductions from the ,persistence of ,force1 can be achieved only in the remote future2 and indeed cannot be completely achieved even then4 ,scientific progress1 is progress in that equilibration of thought and things which we saw is going on1 and must continue to go on2 but which cannot arrive at perfection in any finite period1 because it advances more slowly the further it advances4 ,but though ,science can never be entirely reduced to this form2 and though only at a far distant time can it be brought nearly to this form2 yet much may even now be done in the way of rude approximation4 ,those who are familiar with the present aspects of ,science1 must recognize in them the broken outlines of a general organization4 ,the possibility of arranging the facts already accumulated1 into the order rudely exhibited in the foregoing pages1 will itself incline them to the belief that our knowledge may be put into a more connected shape than it at present has4 ,they will see the probability that many now isolated inductions1 may be reduced to the form of deductions from first principles4 ,they will suspect that inferences drawn from the ultimate laws of force1 will lead to the investigation and generalization of classes of facts hitherto unexamined4 ,and they will feel1 not only that a greater degree of certainty must be acquired by ,science1 as fast as its propositions are directly or indirectly deduced from the highest of all truths2 but also that it must so be rendered a more efficient agent of further inquiry4 ,to bring scientific knowledge to such degree of logical coherence as is at present possible1 is a task to be achieved only by the combined efforts of many4 ,no one man can possess that encyclopedic information required for rightly arranging even the truths already established4 ,but as progress is effected by increments--as all organization1 beginning in faint and blurred outlines1 is completed by successive modifications and additions2 advantage may accrue from an attempt1 however rude1 to reduce the facts already accumulated--or rather certain classes of them--to something like co-ordination4 ,such must be the plea for the several volumes which are to succeed this4 99 99 99 99 99 #ade4 ,a few closing words must be said1 concerning the general bearings of the doctrines that are now to be further developed4 ,before proceeding to interpret the detailed phenomena of ,life1 and ,mind1 and ,society1 in terms of ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force1 the reader must be reminded in what sense the interpretations are to be accepted4 ,in spite of everything said at the outset1 there are probably some who have gained the impression that those most general truths set forth in the preceding chapters1 together with the truths deducible from them1 claim to be something more than relative truths4 ,and1 notwithstanding all evidence to the contrary1 there will probably have arisen in not a few minds1 the conviction that the solutions which have been given1 along with those to be derived from them1 are essentially materialistic4 ,let none persist in these misconceptions4 ,as repeatedly shown in various ways1 the deepest truths we can reach1 are simply statements of the widest uniformities in our experience of the relations of ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force2 and ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force are but symbols of the ,unknown ,reality4 ,that ,power of which the nature remains for ever inconceivable1 and to which no limits in ,time or ,space can be imagined1 works in us certain effects4 ,these effects have certain likenesses of kind1 the most general of which we class together under the names of ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force2 and between these effects there are likenesses of connection1 the most constant of which we class as laws of the highest certainty4 ,analysis reduces these several kinds of effect to one kind of effect2 and these several kinds of uniformity to one kind of uniformity4 ,and the highest achievement of ,science is the interpretation of all orders of phenomena1 as differently-conditioned manifestations of this one kind of effect1 under differently-conditioned modes of this one kind of uniformity4 ,but when ,science has done this1 it has done nothing more than systematize our experience2 and has in no degree extended the limits of our experience4 ,we can say no more than before1 whether the uniformities are as absolutely necessary1 as they have become to our thought relatively necessary4 ,the utmost possibility for us1 is an interpretation of the process of things as it presents itself to our limited consciousness2 but how this process is related to the actual process1 we are unable to conceive1 much less to know4 ,similarly1 it must be remembered that while the connection between the phenomenal order and the ontological order is for ever inscrutable2 so is the connection between the conditioned forms of being and the unconditioned form of being1 for ever inscrutable4 ,the interpretation of all phenomena in terms of ,matter1 ,motion1 and ,force1 is nothing more than the reduction of our complex symbols of thought1 to the simplest symbols2 and when the equation has been brought to its lowest terms the symbols remain symbols still4 ,hence the reasonings contained in the foregoing pages1 afford no support to either of the antagonist hypotheses respecting the ultimate nature of things4 ,their implications are no more materialistic than they are spiritualistic2 and no more spiritualistic than they are materialistic4 ,any argument which is apparently furnished to either hypothesis1 is neutralized by as good an argument furnished to the other4 ,the ,materialist1 seeing it to be a necessary deduction from the law of correlation1 that what exists in consciousness under the form of feeling1 is transformable into an equivalent of mechanical motion1 and by consequence into equivalents of all the other forces which matter exhibits2 may consider it therefore demonstrated that the phenomena of consciousness are material phenomena4 ,but the ,spiritualist1 setting out with the same data1 may argue with equal cogency1 that if the forces displayed by matter are cognizable only under the shape of those equivalent amounts of consciousness which they produce1 it is to be inferred that these forces1 when existing out of consciousness1 are of the same intrinsic nature as when existing in consciousness2 and that so is justified the spiritualistic conception of the external world1 as consisting of something essentially identical with what we call mind4 ,manifestly1 the establishment of correlation and equivalence between the forces of the outer and the inner worlds1 may be used to assimilate either to the other2 according as we set out with one or other term4 ,but he who rightly interprets the doctrine contained in this work1 will see that neither of these terms can be taken as ultimate4 ,he will see that though the relation of subject and object renders necessary to us these antithetical conceptions of ,spirit and ,matter2 the one is no less than the other to be regarded as but a sign of the ,unknown ,reality which underlies both4 ,,the ,,end4 ,,john ,,childs ,,and ,,son1 ,,printers4 ---------------------------------------- -------------------------------- ,,transcriber',s ,,notes #a4 ,changed 8which takes place0 to 8which take place0 on p4 #cae4 #b4 ,duplicated the large spaces in the original text4 #c4 ,silently corrected typographical errors4 #d4 ,retained anachronistic and non-standard spellings as printed4 #e4 ,enclosed italics font in underscores4