EVOLUTION AND ETHICS. 189 



As I have already urged, the practice of that which is ethically- 

 best what we call goodness or virtue involves a course of con- 

 duct which, in all respects, is opposed to that which leads to suc- 

 cess in the cosmic struggle for existence. In place of ruthless 

 self-assertion it demands self-restraint ; in place of thrusting aside, 

 or treading down, all competitors, it requires that the individual 

 shall not merely respect, but shall help his fellows ; its influence 

 is directed, not so much to the survival of the fittest, as to the 

 fitting of as many as possible to survive. It repudiates the gladia- 

 torial theory of existence. It demands that each man who enters 

 into the enjoyment of the advantages of a polity shall be mindful 

 of his debt to those who have laboriously constructed it ; and shall 

 take heed that no act of his weakens the fabric in which he has 

 been permitted to live. Laws and moral precepts are directed to 

 the end of curbing the cosmic process and reminding the indi- 

 vidual of his duty to the community, to the protection and influ- 

 ence of which he owes, if not existence itself, at least the life of 

 something better than a brutal savage. 



It is from neglect of these plain considerations that the fanat- 

 ical individualism of our time attempts to apply the analogy of 

 cosmic Nature to society. Once more we have a misapplication 

 of the stoical injunction to follow Nature ; the duties of the indi- 

 vidual to the state are forgotten and his tendencies to self-asser- 

 tion are dignified by the name of rights. It is seriously debated 

 whether the members of a community are justified in using their 

 combined strength to constrain one of their number to contribute 

 his share to the maintenance of it ; or even to prevent him from 

 doing his best to destroy it. The struggle for existence, which 

 has done such admirable work in cosmic Nature, must, it appears, 

 be equally beneficent in the ethical sphere. Yet, if that which I 

 have insisted upon is true ; if the cosmic process has no sort of 

 relation to moral ends ; if the imitation of it by man is inconsist- 

 ent with the first principles of ethics ; what becomes of this sur- 

 prising theory ? 



Let us understand, once for all, that the ethical progress of 

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

 running away from it, but in combating it. It may seem an auda- 

 cious proposal thus to pit the microcosm against the macrocosm 

 and to set man to subdue Nature to his higher ends ; but, I venture 

 to think that the great intellectual difi'erence between the ancient 

 times with which we have been occupied and our day, lies in the 

 solid foundation we have acquired for the hope that such an enter- 

 prise may meet with a certain measure of success. 



The history of civilization details the steps by which men have 

 succeeded in building up an artificial world within the cosmos. 

 Fragile reed as he may be, man, as Pascal says, is a thinking 



