LESSONS FEOM NATURE. [CHAP. VII. 



ties also ; and similarly, because we are, as we all know, 

 sentient, conscious automata, it by no means follows that we 

 are no more than such automata. The first meaning sug 

 gested cannot then be his true meaning. Yet the second 

 meaning seems at least equally open to objection. It is so 

 open for two reasons : first, because it contradicts the Pro 

 fessor s express declaration on a former occasion that the 

 human will does count for something ; secondly, because it 

 contradicts, as we have seen, the primary and ultimate decla 

 rations of consciousness. It is all very well to profess not to 

 care for consequences ; but, after all, the consequence that 

 otherwise two right lines would have to inclose a space, is a 

 sufficient reason for asserting the equality of the bases of two 

 triangles having two equal sides inclosing equal angles.* 

 There is yet another reason why the Professor cannot have 

 meant to deny every element of spontaneity to the human will : 

 namely, because he cites as on his side Calvin, Malebranche, 

 St. Augustin, and Kant ! But even Calvin never denied free 

 will in the sense in which it is denied by Mill and Spencer. 

 He did not deny such power to the natural man, but only to 

 man in that wwnatural, degraded condition in which, accord 

 ing to the Calvinistic doctrine respecting &quot; the fall,&quot; he now 

 is. A very able writer in the North British Review t re 

 marks that very erroneous opinions are current about the 

 bearing of Calvinism on that doctrine of Mill, Spencer, and 

 Huxley called &quot; Determinism :&quot; 



&quot; Determinism and predestination spring from premisses 

 which lie quite in separate regions of thought.&quot; &quot; The pre- 

 destinarian is obliged by his theology to admit the existence 



* Professor Tyndall introduced Professor Huxley to his audience as a man 

 &quot; perfectly fearless in his utterances.&quot; But it may well be asked what has 

 any one to fear in giving expression to such views as Professor Tyndall 

 appears to favour ? Surely it is quite opposite views which involve social 

 persecution, which entail political ostracism and the denial of State aid. No 

 fear of man need deter any one. If, then, Professor Tyndall refers to &quot; the 

 fear of the Lord&quot; as that the absence of which is praiseworthy, he selects for 

 eulogy that which is not proverbially considered as the indication of a great 

 advance in wisdom. 



f For April 1870 : &amp;lt; The Will and Free-will.&quot; 



