CORRESP ONDENCE. 



499 



If the reader will now open Cosmic 

 Philosophy, he is told in vigorous lan- 

 guage (vol. ii, p. 405) that "if there 

 exist a personal Creator of the universe 

 who is infinitely intelligent and power- 

 ful, he can not be infinitely good; if, 

 on the other hand, he be infinite in good- 

 ness, then he must be lamentably finite 

 in power or in intelligence. By this 

 two-edged difficulty, theology has ever 

 been foiled." Then (vol. ii, p. 406) Mr. 

 Fiske, quoting from Mill, expresses his 

 entire concurrence with the views of 

 this eminent thinker, and adds (vol. ii, 

 p. 407), "With Mr. Mill, therefore, 'I 

 will call no being good who is not what 

 I mean when I apply that epithet to 

 my fellow-creatures.' And, going a step 

 further, I will add that it is impossible 

 to call that being good who, existing 

 prior to the phenomenal universe and 

 creating it out of the plenitude of in- 

 finite power and foreknowledge, en- 

 dowed it with such properties that its 

 material and moral development must 

 inevitably be attended by the misery of 

 untold millions of sentient creatures for 

 whose existence their Creator is ulti- 

 mately alone responsible." 



No comment of mine can show more 

 clearly than the passages cited above 

 the " conversion " of Mr. Fiske, against 

 which imputation so much subtle in- 

 genuity is expended in the preface to 

 The Idea of God. 



That Mr. Fiske is merely reviving 

 gross anthropoeentrie views he himself 

 admits. To him, man is " the goal to- 

 ward which Nature's work has been 

 tending from the first." But might not 

 also some pithecoid ancestors of ours 

 have deemed themselves the " goal to- 

 ward which Nature had been tending 

 from the first " ? Wliat is Nature's goal 

 in the endless cycle of evolution in 

 which life is but an infinitesimal part? 

 But with Huxley I believe that " it 

 would be a new thing in history if a 

 priori philosophers were daunted by a 

 factious opposition of experience." Mr. 

 Fiske's latest writings, as all theodicies, 

 bear testimony to the truth of Huxley's 

 scathing remark. 



But granting, for the sake of the ar- 

 gument, that " in the d,eepest sense it is 

 as true as it ever was held to be, that the 

 world was made for man," there is an 

 objection to be raised on moral grounds 

 stronger than any that could be founded 



on scientific arguments. Had this world 

 been created for man, entailing, as it 

 does, the " misery of untold millions of 

 sentient creatures," who but the crassest 

 egotist could worship this Fiskean God 

 of iniquity? 



The careful student of Thomas Hux- 

 ley's works may be surprised to find 

 Through Nature to God " consecrated " 

 to the memory of him whose life work 

 was devoted to " untiring opposition to 

 that ecclesiastical spirit " that shines 

 through every page of Mr. Fiske's latest 

 writings. I echo Mr. Fiske's words: "I 

 can never cease to regret that Huxley 

 should have passed away without see- 

 ing my [Mr. Fiske's] arguments and 

 giving me the benefit of his comments." 

 The last stroke of Huxley's pen was 

 giving Mr. Balfour " the benefit of his 

 comments " ; would that he could have 

 given them to the author of the excur- 

 sion Through Nature to God! 



B. A. Behkend. 

 Eeie, Pa., December 5, 1S90. 



Editor Popular Science Monthly : 



Sir: Your trenchant criticism of Mr. 

 John Fiske's discussion of the mystery 

 of evil recalls Mr. Spencer's reminder 

 that " there is a soul of truth in all 

 things erroneous." 



Mr. Fiske certainly has not made it 

 plain that the meaning of the universe 

 is to be found (exclusively) in the 

 higher developments of love and self- 

 sacrifice; but is it not equally a mistake 

 to say inferentially that " on a broad 

 view of the world-wide struggle for life 

 there are no moral elements to be seen"? 

 If we define morality as the equivalent 

 merely of love and self-sacrifice, the ever- 

 present love of mother and, in a degree, 

 of father for the off"spring imperatively 

 negatives such a conclusion. 



But morality is something more than 

 love and self-sacrifice. Morality is right 

 conduct, and right conduct in the last 

 analysis is conformity to the conditions 

 of existence. The nearer the conform- 

 ity, the more complete the life, and life 

 approaches completeness only as the ac- 

 tivities of men cease to be impeded by 

 each other's aggressions, the highest life 

 being reached when men help to com- 

 plete one another's lives. 



Conversely, evil must be defined aa 

 nonconformity to the conditions of ex- 

 istence. Slowly but surely man is learn- 



