Ill 



SCIENCE AND MORALS 139 



moiety of the chain of causes and effects, by which 

 the phenomena we call material give rise to those 

 which we call mental ; hereafter, we shall get to 

 the further end of the series. 



In my innocence, I have been in the habit of 

 supposing that this is merely a statement of facts, 

 and that the good Bishop Berkeley, if he were 

 alive, would find such facts fit into his system 

 without the least difficulty. That Mr. Lilly 

 should play into the hands of his foes, by declaring 

 that unmistakable facts make for them, is an 

 exemplification of ways that are dark, quite un 

 intelligible to me. Surely Mr. Lilly does not hold 

 that the disbelief in spontaneity which term, if 

 it has any meaning at all, means uncaused action 

 is a mark of the beast Materialism ? If so, he 

 must be prepared to tackle many of the Cartesians 

 (if not Descartes himself), Spinoza and Leibnitz 

 among the philosophers, Augustine, Thomas 

 Aquinas, Calvin and his followers among theolo 

 gians, as Materialists and that surely is a suffi 

 cient rcd iictin erf absurdttm of such a classification. 



The truth is, that in his zeal to paint &quot; Material 

 ism,&quot; in large letters, on everything he dislikes, 

 Mr. Lilly forgets a very important fact, which, 

 however, must be patent to every one who has 

 paid attention to the history of human thought ; 

 and that fact is, that every one of the specu 

 lative difficulties which beset Kant s three prob 

 lems, the existence of a Deity, the freedom of the 



