DISCUSSION 97 



is wrong philosophically, because only an 

 infinitely perfect Being God can have in 

 Himself the reason of his existence. Therefore 

 we must admit the creation of matter by God. 

 (Cf. my second lecture.) The admission of 

 creation does not furnish us with a scientific 

 explanation (for this is not possible in the case 

 of metaphysical problems), but it gives us a 

 philosophical explanation. Plate s argument : 

 Matter exists nothing is formed out of 

 nothing therefore matter is everlasting is 

 quite contrary to philosophy. Certainly it 

 is impossible for anything spontaneously 

 to proceed from nothing, but a finite being 

 can begin to exist, if it is called into existence 

 by an infinite being. 



Professor Plate went on to say that I had discussed 

 the origin of living creatures, and that two views 

 were opposed to one another on the subject. We 

 scientists maintain that there must have been a 

 beginning of life, but that to assume creation would 

 not be to account for it. We ask further whether 

 we can penetrate more deeply into the subject. If 

 we have points tfappui, we are justified in setting 

 up an hypothesis, of the conditional truth of which 

 we are convinced. We all admit that we are not 

 yet able to observe the manner in which living 

 beings have proceeded from inorganic matter, but 

 we may lay down the hypothesis that in some 



a 



