370 



THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY.— SUPPLEMENT. 



THE PEOBLEM OF 



FIXAL CAUSES AKD 

 PHYSIOLOGY. 1 



By PAUL JANET. 



CONTEMPOKAKY 



FOR centuries the existence of God has been 

 proved by the wonders of Nature, or, as 

 philosophers express it, by final causes. Fenelon 

 developed this argument eloquently in a famous 

 work ; Cicero expounded it before him, almost in 

 the same terms ; and, still longer ago, Socrates, 

 as we learn from Xenophon, furnished the first 

 text upon which Cicero and Fenelon enlarged, and 

 if he is apparently the first philosopher who used 

 this argument, it is likely that popular good sense 

 had anticipated him. In modern times, many 

 philosophers and savants have applied their minds 

 to the study of final causes. 2 It has even given 

 rise to a complete science, natural theology, which 

 in England, Germany, Holland, and Switzerland, 

 has produced numberless works, equally instruc- 

 tive and interesting. The freest and boldest 

 minds have not succeeded in escaping the influ- 

 ence of this argument. Voltaire, notwithstanding 

 the pleasantries of " Candide," was strongly im- 

 pressed by it, and his friends the encyclopedists 

 rallied him with the nickname of " final-causer." 

 So ancient and so universal an argument, pow- 

 erful enough to command the common support 

 of Fenelon and Voltaire, which even Kant, while 

 criticising it at some points, never mentions with- 

 out respect and sympathy, will always have a per- 

 suasive and prevalent force ; there will always be 

 a use and interest in bringing it again before men's 

 view, and strengthening it by new instances. 

 Every generation should be able to read the har- 

 monies of Nature in a language adapted to the ex- 

 isting state of science. No philosopher can regard 

 as beneath him a work that demands at once vast 

 acquirements, solid comprehension of the prob- 

 lem, and tact so practised as to bring himself 

 within the range and reach of all, without lower- 

 ing the dignity of science or changing the truth of 

 facts. These are the merits of a late book, by M. 

 Charles Leveque, on "Providential Harmonies," 

 a work written with seriousness and imagination 

 both. Less brilliant than Bernardin de St.-Pierre, 



1 Translated by A. R. Macdonough. 



3 Final cause, in scholastic language, signifies ob- 

 ject. Tbe argument from final causes consists in say- 

 ing that there are in Nature objects and means adapted 

 to these objects or ends, which implies foresight and 

 wisdom. From the work we infer the workman. 



the author is more exact and deserving of con- 

 fidence. His book will gain a high place among 

 good treatises on natural theology, less common 

 in France than in other countries. Those of that 

 kind we possess are indeed usually more eloquent 

 than argumentative. Fenelon's treatise on the 

 existence of God, for instance, is doubtless an 

 admirable book ; but Fenelon, though a charming 

 writer and a profound and refined metaphysician, 

 was not versed in the sciences ; the facts he cites 

 are few in number and far too vague, and he 

 leans oftener on ignorance than on science in 

 calling us to admire the wonders of Nature. The 

 " Studies " and " Harmonies " of Bernardin de St.- 

 Pierre are richer in facts, and there is no question 

 as to the author's varied and extensive scientific 

 knowledge ; but his science is poetic and daring, 

 too often inexact, and scarcely deserving confi- 

 dence in its assertions, which at every step are, or 

 may be, mingled with mistakes. Besides, the mani- 

 fest abuse both these authors make of final causes, 

 even reaching in the latter the point of absurdity, 

 gravely endangers the cause they support. M. 

 Leveque's book, on the contrary, while free from 

 these defects, is sustained by the most solid sci- 

 entific knowledge; the facts are well selected, 

 and simply set forth, the difficulties not evaded, 

 and, though the frame of the book does not admit 

 their thorough discussion, they are attacked and 

 solved with neatness and precision. It will be 

 said that this is popular philosophy. If so, that 

 is high praise. True philosophy is that which 

 knows how to devote itself to all, and can speak 

 the language of the schools and of home both. 

 Nothing is more lofty than Plato's philosophy, 

 yet how popular it is besides ! Shallow reflection 

 keeps us apart from popular philosophy — deeper 

 reflection brings us back to it again. Bossuet 

 says, " It is ill for barren knowledge that does not 

 change into love." We may say further, " It is 

 ill with that pure philosophy that does not look 

 to the instruction and improvement of mankind." 

 Still, criticism and the rational process must 

 not lose their rights. Popular philosophy aims 

 chiefly at results ; scientific philosophy seeks for 

 and tests principles. All natural theology rests 

 on the analogy between human industry and Na- 

 ture's industry, the art of man and Nature's art. 



