EVOLUTIONARY TELEOLOGY. 389 



something which produces — as well as that which re- 

 sults in the survival of — " the fittest/' 



We have been considering this class of questions 

 only as a naturalist might who sought for the proper 

 or reasonable interpretation of the problem before 

 him, unmingled with considerations from any other 

 source. Weightier arguments in the last resort, 

 drawn from the intellectual and moral constitution of 

 man, lie on a higher plane, to which it was unneces- 

 sary for our particular purpose to rise, however indis- 

 pensable this be to a full presentation of the evidence 

 of mind in Nature. To us the evidence, judged as 

 impartially as we are capable of judging, appears con- 

 vincing. But, whatever view one unconvinced may 

 take, it cannot remain doubtful what position a the- 

 ist ought to occupy. If he cannot recognize design 

 in Nature because of evolution, he may be ranked 

 with those of whom it was said, " Except ye see 

 signs and wonders ye will not believe." How strange 

 that a convinced theist should be so prone to associate 

 design only with miracle ! 



All turns, however, upon what is meant by this 

 Nature, to which it appears more and more probable 

 that the being and becoming — no less than the well- 

 being and succession — of species and genera, as' well 

 as of individuals, are committed. To us it means " the 

 world of force and movement in time and space," as 

 Aristotle defined it — the system and totality of things 

 in the visible universe. 



What is generally called Nature Prof. Tyndall 

 names matter — a peculiar nomenclature, requiring 

 new definitions (as he avers), inviting misunderstand- 



