460 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY.— SUPPLEMENT. 



the soul of the plastidule would be the ultimate 

 factor to which could be reduced the psychic life 

 of living things." l And inasmuch as the theory 

 of evolution shows itself to be a unifying and 

 monistic bond between the most diverse sciences, 

 it must also be, in Haeckel's opinion, the most 

 powerful instrument in education, and should find 

 a place in the schools. A reform of our educa- 

 tional systems in this sense he declares to be in- 

 evitable, and destined to lead to the happiest re- 

 sults. True, we have at the same time to meet 

 the requirements of practical philosophy, and to 

 construct a new doctrine of morals; but this may 

 be confidently expected to spring forth from the 

 germ of natural religion that lives in the breast 

 of every man. As for the sense of duty, it is 

 simply a social instinct. The ethics of the evolu- 

 tion theory does not need to go in search of new 

 principles, but has only to trace back to their 

 scientific basis the immemorial precepts of the 

 moral law. 



Such is the substance of Haeckel's thoughtful 

 address. For those who are acquainted with his 

 writings, his conclusions contain nothing that is 

 surprising, though we must confess that to us the 

 fulfillment of Haeckel's hopes appears still to lie 

 in the distant future. Haeckel speaks with all 

 confidence in the correctness of his views, which 

 are based on the Darwinian theory. That many 

 points connected with that theory are still hypo- 

 thetical is not to be denied ; nevertheless we must 

 not, as does Karl Griin, in the Allgemeine Zcitung, 

 represent the theory itself as pure hypothesis, for 

 the firm ground on which it rests, namely, pale- 

 ontology, is a vast science of experience admitting 

 only of one or other of just two theories, the theory 

 of evolution and the theory of supernatural cre- 

 ation. Perhaps Herr Griin can imagine a third. 

 Again, granting that Haeckel's doctrine of the de- 

 velopment of the plastidule soul into the human 

 mind is, in the eyes of " exact science," nothing 

 but a " grand hypothesis," we must bear in mind 

 that all the other explanations with which hith- 

 erto we fain would have contented ourselves are 

 also, when tried by " exact science," simply hy- 

 potheses, only less grand, less ingenious, less 

 conformable to demonstrated facts. Again, we 

 may differ with Haeckel about that true " rational 

 religion" which he contrasts with the dogmatic, 

 mythological religion of the churches, but we do 

 the latter no service by pronouncing monism to 

 be " religionless." However, I entirely agree with 



1 Supplement No. X., p. 293, where a faulty 

 punctuation materially alters the sense of the 6econd 

 sentence in this passage. 



Haeckel where he represents the natural moral law 

 as resulting from the social instincts of animals, 

 and hence as far more ancient than any church 

 religion. To the philosophical historian and the 

 ethnologist it appears a perfectly obvious idea to 

 trace ethics up back from man ; in other words, to 

 trace the natural moral law, which was common 

 to primitive man with social animals, from that 

 early period down through the course of history 

 to the present time, and among every race of 

 mankind. Such an investigation would infallibly 

 prove that in the ethics of the most advanced na- 

 tions — aside from the refinements and polish of 

 the more recent periods of civilization — that only 

 can lay claim to legitimacy which is in agreement 

 with the natural law of morals spoken of by 

 Haeckel. The moral ideas of mankind vary ac- 

 cording to latitude, race, and time ; but it were im- 

 possible to name, in any age, a race of people, 

 however rude or however civilized, who are en- 

 tirely without the natural moral law of love and 

 sense of duty which appears in the social life of 

 animals. Hence, in my judgment, Haeckel's prop- 

 osition is perfectly correct, that ethics does not 

 have to offer any new laws. Other laws than those 

 just mentioned it never has had. And if once we 

 come to understand that only those moral rules 

 which are ours in common with all social animals 

 constitute the sole permanent contents of an ethi- 

 cal code for all men without exception, while all 

 that is outside of this, being variable according 

 to time and place, must be regarded as non-es- 

 sential and accessory — in other words, that only 

 the former class of rules constitute the inalterable 

 " moral law " — it is clear that we have the pri- 

 mordial precepts of duty referred to their scientif.c 

 basis. It cannot be denied that this moral code 

 existed long before the advent of any church re- 

 ligion whatever. Those systems of morals which 

 from time to time have crystallized around the 

 main stem of the natural moral law found ex- 

 pression in the divers church religions, and so ex- 

 isted prior to them. Does any one suppose that, 

 for instance, Christianity, as a popular religion, 

 could have won adherents as it did, had not a 

 mighty revolution in the morality of the heathen 

 world preceded it — a revolution which needed 

 for its sanction a new edifice of religion ? .Besides, 

 how are we to explain the unquestioned existence 

 of systems of morality — crude though they be — 

 among savage tribes who never have heard of a 

 church religion ? 



As may be seen from the foregoing, Haeckel's 

 discourse gives occasion to the expression of 

 very diverse opinions. But it was not upon these 



