48 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY 



the way of a self-annihilating individualism and utilitarianism, could 

 hardly be other than the way to the mad-house; and finally of number- 

 less mediumly endowed souls in whom such doctrines could not fail to 

 beget a pusillanimous indifferentism toward all human weal excepting 

 such as can be seen to be directly advantageous to one's own weal. 



We may be sure that the volumes of social and ethical doctrine that 

 have been written from, not the Darwinian, but the neo-Darwinian, 

 standpoint, and the still larger volumes of unethical practise that have 

 consciously and unconsciously been instigated and justified from the 

 same standpoint, would have brought inexpressible anguish to the noble 

 spirit of Charles Darwin, could he but have seen them in full flower 

 and fruit. 



My conclusion then as to Darwin's probable place in future biology 

 may be summed up thus : Darwin has been frequently called the New- 

 ton of Biology. Not so ! Newton discovered a great mathematical, 

 that is, exactly expressible law of nature. Darwin found no such law. 

 For its real Newton, biology will probably have to wait another fifty 

 years at least. When he appears he will be a mathematical biologist. 



If the counterpart of Darwin in inorganic science is to be sought, 

 Copernicus rather than Newton would be the man. The revolution in 

 men's attitude toward nature wrought by each of these was much the 

 same, both in kind and magnitude, and both men's names will grow 

 brighter on the pages of history so long as mortals are stirred by the 

 beauty of orderliness and law, and by what is lovely in form and color 

 and motion; so long as they have feelings of gratitude and obligation 

 for what has gone to the making of themselves and the things they 

 enjoy, what they are ; and so long as their faith in the Infinite Whole of 

 Things abides and waxes stronger. 



" Super-man " may be, this much is certain : It, or he, is man-, not God-con- 

 ceived, and is to be man-, not God-created. 



Nietzsche's enterprise made it necessary for him to kill God thoroughly. 

 While even the suggestion of such a thing was abhorrent to Darwin, it is never- 

 theless true that among the most trusted weapons used by Nietzsche in his 

 killing, were the very ones of individualism and conflict used by Darwin, and it 

 matters not so far as my main point is concerned, whether Nietzsche got his 

 instruments from Darwin or from the same factory that Darwin's came from. 



