THE MOTIVE FOR SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH. 505 



hue and cry about the impiety and folly of the act ; a very large 

 number of scientific men really supposed that the question was 

 beyond the limits of actual knowledge. And yet is not the doc- 

 trine of evolution becoming less and less of an hypothesis and 

 more and more of an actually established law every year ? Is not 

 the evidence all tending to establish it completely, and to prove 

 that even the obscure problems of life and heredity are all within 

 the limits of human knowledge ? Can we then be sure that the 

 knowledge of why evolution has worked as it has is unattain- 

 able ? Is not the presumption strongly in favor of the proba- 

 bility that some day, somewhere, some race of men, our posterity 

 and the legatees of our knowledge, will know and understand the 

 causes and the " reasons why " which have led to and are now 



leading toward that 



"... one far-off divine event 

 To which the whole creation moves" ? 



If, then, it is granted that this knowledge is a possibility, it is 

 fitting that we should consider whether there is any clew to the 

 solution of the problem in the work already done, and what effect 

 the question will have on the methods and spirit of scientific re- 

 search. We have already seen how long a time the doctrine of 

 immutability of species held in check the tendency to theorize and 

 led students to devote themselves to the collection and tabulation 

 of facts. Both questions, how and why, were confused together and 

 were answered promptly and positively : " The Creator designed 

 them so " ; and there was the end beyond appeal. When it was 

 found, however, that this was really no answer at all to the ques- 

 tion How ? and that the true answer to that question was within 

 the immediate grasp of the scientific world, the whole argument of 

 design was promptly thrown aside as rubbish, and we were free ! 

 But we were not long to remain so, for now we find a new limit 

 set to our knowledge beyond which there is no appeal, and the 

 answer to our question Why ? is now given us, " Evolution evolved 

 them so " ! Distinguishing now as we do between how and why, 

 we find this limit is equally distasteful and causes a similar feel- 

 ing of restraint ; and it is only natural that, having been freed 

 from the other, we should demand emancipation from this. Why 

 did evolution evolve some birds into objects of such marvelous 

 beauty ? Surely we can conceive of peacocks, humming birds, 

 and birds of paradise fully as well, perhaps even better, fitted for 

 the struggle for existence without their gleaming colors and 

 gorgeous plumes. Why are some flowers so fragrant to our sense 

 of smell ? We certainly know that it is no advantage to them to 

 please us, as long as they attract insects, and we also know that 

 odor without fragrance will answer that' purpose. Was it only 

 chance that brought about these results ? It seems incredible 



VOL. XL VII. 41 



