XI PHENOMENA OF ORGANIC NATURE 467 



hypothesis; in this case all you can say is, 

 that your hypothesis is in the same position as a 

 good many others. 



Now, as to the third test, that there are no 

 other causes competent to explain the phenomena, 

 I explained to you that one should be able to say 

 of an hypothesis, that no other known causes than 

 those supposed by it are competent to give rise to 

 the phenomena. Here, I think, Mr. Darwin's 

 view is pretty strong. I really believe that the 

 alternative is either Darwinism or nothing, for I 

 do not know of any rational conception or theory 

 of the organic universe which has any scientific 

 position at all beside Mr. Darwin's. I do not 

 know of any proposition that has been put before 

 us with the intention of explaining the phenomena 

 of organic nature, which has in its favour a 

 thousandth part of the evidence which may be ad- 

 duced in favour of Mr. Darwin's views. Whatever 

 may be the objections to his views, certainly all 

 other theories are absolutely out of court. 



Take the Lamarckian hypothesis, for example. 

 Lamarck was a great naturalist, and to a certain 

 extent went the right way to work ; he argued 

 from what was undoubtedly a true cause of some 

 of the phenomena of organic nature. He said it 

 is a matter of experience that an animal may be 

 modified more or less in consequence of its desires 

 and consequent actions. Thus, if a man exercise 

 himself as a blacksmith, his arms will become 



H H '2 



