xii INTRODUCTION 



various systems. Changes in these groupings constitute what we call 

 evolution. Random samplings of all parts of the universe — possible 

 through the spectroscope — prove that all consist of the same kinds of 

 particles moving in accordance with the same laws of motion. Hence 

 from a knowledge of any part of the universe it follows logically that we 

 can know about all the rest. Reduced to its lowest terms, the universe 

 consists simply of matter and energy. Since the total amount of matter 

 and energy is constant and evolution consists of changes in the distribu- 

 tion of matter, it would be theoretically possible, if we knew enough, to 

 calculate the future changes in arrangement, and predict the course of 

 evolution. Since living organisms consist of the same kinds of particles 

 as are found in the lifeless world and no form of energy peculiar to the 

 living has been discovered, prediction of what will happen in the living 

 world involves no new factors. 



Against such a mechanical conception of evolution and of the universe 

 most minds revolt. To accept such a conception would mean the rejec- 

 tion of the most cherished beliefs of mankind. If the universe be a great 

 machine, and nothing more, there is obviously no place for freedom, moral 

 responsibility, or for values of any sort. Might and might alone prevails. 

 In a mechanical world, ideas, ideals, and aspirations, if they existed, could 

 have no more influence in the course of events than do shadows cast on a 

 summer day. But, it may be asked, if the universe is in reality a giant 

 machine in which all changes are only alterations of systems of moving 

 particles, how could there be any evolution at all? Mechanical changes 

 undoubtedly do occur in the universe as, for example, in the revolutions 

 of the planets around the sun. But changes like these are not truly 

 evolutionary at all. A mechanical universe which started with matter 

 and energy could consistently have only matter and energy in the end. 

 From such a point of view, the universe could contain only "eternally old 

 things." But evolution is above all else a process of novelty production. 

 Life and consciousness are such novelties. By no hocus pocus could a 

 magician with matter and energy in his hat conjure such entities as mind 

 or ethics. The mechanists, says Carrel, referring to living organisms, 

 have "built a machine, and like the vitaHsts, they were the engineers of 

 the machine. Then as Woodger pointed out, they forgot the existence of 

 that engineer." Mechanical evolutionists have made the same mistake. 



While the mechanical conception of evolution may appear simple, 

 clear, and logical, it ignores too many facts to be true. The facts accord 

 better with the opposing emergent conception of evolution. According 

 to the doctrine of emergent evolution, evolution is above all else a process 

 of novelty-production. The differences which distinguish higher from 

 lower organisms are not simply quantitative but qualitative. The dififer- 

 ences are such that it is impossible to reduce the higher to terms of the 



