46 CREATIVE EVOLUTION 



said to remain united with the totality of living 

 beings by invisible bonds. So it is of no use to try 

 to restrict finality to the individuality of the living 

 being. If there is finality in the world of life, it 

 includes the whole of life in a single indivisible 

 embrace. This life common to all the living un 

 doubtedly presents many gaps and incoherences, and 

 again it is not so mathematically one that it cannot 

 allow each being to become individualized to a cer 

 tain degree. But it forms a single whole, none the 

 less ; and we have to choose between the out-and- 

 out negation of finality and the hypothesis which co 

 ordinates not only the parts of an organism with the 

 organism itself, but also each living being with the 

 collective whole of all others. 



Finality will not go down any easier for being 

 taken as a powder. Either the hypothesis of a finality 

 immanent in life should be rejected as a whole, or 

 it must undergo a treatment very different from 

 pulverization. 



The error of radical finalism, as also that of radical 

 mechanism, is to extend too far the application of 

 certain concepts that are natural to our intellect. 

 Originally, we think only in order to act. Our 

 intellect has been cast in the mould of action. 

 Speculation is a luxury, while action is a necessity. 

 Now, in order to act, we begin by proposing an end ; 

 we make a plan, then we go on to the detail of the 

 mechanism which will bring it to pass. This latter 

 operation is possible only if we know what we can 

 reckon on. We must therefore have managed to 

 extract resemblances from nature, which enable us to 

 anticipate the future. Thus we must, consciously or 



