594 THE POPULAR SCIENCE MONTHLY. 



the doctrine of evolution to be materialistic in its implications. 

 There are able writers who have done good service in illustrating 

 portions of the general doctrine, and are at the same time avowed 

 materialists. One may be a materialist, whatever his scientific 

 theory of things ; and to such a person the materialism naturally 

 seems to be a logical consequence from the scientific theory. We 

 have received this evening a communication from Prof. Ernst 

 Haeckel, of Jena, in which he lays down five theses regarding the 

 doctrine of evolution : 



1. " The general doctrine appears to be already unassailably 

 founded. 



2. " Thereby every supernatural creation is completely ex- 

 cluded. 



3. " Transformism and the theory of descent are inseparable 

 constituent parts of the doctrine of evolution. 



4. " The necessary consequence of this last conclusion is the 

 descent of man from a series of vertebrates." 



So far, very good ; we are within the limits of scientific com- 

 petence, where Prof. Haeckel is strong. But now, in his fifth 

 thesis, he enters the region of metaphysics the transcendental re- 

 gion, which science has no competent methods of exploring and 

 commits himself to a dogmatic assertion : 



5. " The belief in an ' immortal soul ' and in ' a personal God ' 

 are therewith " (i. e., with the four preceding statements) " com- 

 pletely ununitable (vollig u?wereinbar)." 



Now, if Prof. Haeckel had contented himself with asserting 

 that these two beliefs are not susceptible of scientific demonstra- 

 tion ; if he had simply said that they are beliefs concerning which 

 a scientific man, in his scientific capacity, ought to refrain from 

 making assertions because Science knows nothing whatever about 

 the subject he would have occupied an impregnable position. 

 His fifth thesis would have been as indisputable as his first four. 

 But Prof. Haeckel does not stop here. He declares virtually that, 

 if an evolutionist is found entertaining the beliefs in a personal 

 God and an immortal soul, nevertheless these beliefs are not 

 philosophically reconcilable with his scientific theory of things, 

 but are mere remnants of an old-fashioned superstition from which 

 he has not succeeded in freeing himself. 



Here one must pause to inquire what Prof. Haeckel means by 

 "a persona] God." If he refers to the Latin conception of a God 

 remote from the world of phenomena and manifested only through 

 occasional interference the conception that has until lately pre- 

 vailed in the Western world since the time of St. Augustine then 

 we may agree with him ; the practical effect of the doctrine of 

 evolution is to abolish such a conception. But with regard to 

 the Greek conception entertained by St. Athanasius ; the concep- 



