330 THE POPVLAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



But the advent of a being who has such faculties as man has, 

 and whose career really conflicts with, and reverses the great pro- 

 cess of cosmic evolution, may well have had an origin different in 

 kind from that of every other animal at least, so far as regards 

 his intellectual principle.* For he is a being with two natures in 

 one person, and thus it is that when we speak of " the whole of 

 Nature," or " the natural world," a definition of our meaning is 

 needed in order to avoid ambiguity. The term " Nature " may be 

 used in a broad or in a narrow sense. 



In the broad sense f of the word, it includes man with all his 

 powers and their effects, while in the narrow sense of the word 

 Nature he is excluded from it. 



Much may be said for the latter use of the term, since man, by 

 his intelligence and will, is able to change the whole course of 

 physical causation. Thus his power, when contrasted with all the 

 other powers of Nature known to us, may, in a sense, be termed 

 " supernatural," and he may be truly said to " perform miracles." 

 So great, indeed, is the contrast and distance between man and the 

 world of irrational nature, that it suggests now, as it suggested of 

 old, a contrast and difference on the other side I mean, it sug- 

 gested the existence of a " real supernatural '' of a mode of being 

 which is raised above all human nature, as man himself is raised 

 above all infra-human nature. 



And so I come to one of the corollaries which I think results 

 from such a change of view with respect to man as the words 

 above quoted J from Prof. Huxley would seem to indicate namely, 

 the recognition of a Divine All-perfect Creator of the world and 

 man. 



This corollary Prof. Huxley seems as yet indisposed to admit, 

 although he has elsewhere* spoken of man as "here and there re- 

 flecting a ray from the infinite source of truth ! " He is, as yet, 

 plainly indisposed to admit it, because he declares || that the exist- 



* In my Genesis of Species (1871), i). 325, I said : " Man, according to the old scholastic 

 definition, is a rational animal {animal rofioyiah), and his animality is distinct in natnre 

 from his rationality, though inseparably joined during life in one common personality. Plan's 

 animal body must have had a different source from that of the spiritual soul which informs 

 it, owing to the distinctness of the two orders to which these two existences severally belong. 

 . . . That the first man should have had this double origin agrees with what we now ex- 

 perience. For, supposing each human soul to be directly and immediately created, yet each 

 human body is evolved by the ordinary operation of natural physical laws. . . . Man is, 

 indeed, compound ; in him two distinct orders of being impinge and mingle ; and with this 

 composite nature an origin from two concurient modes of action is congruous, and might be 

 expected a priorU^ 



f The sense used by me in my Lessons from Nature (John Murray), 1876. 



X See p. 327. See Man's Tlace in Nature, p. 112. 



I [December Monthly, p. isi.J 



