48 SYMBIOSIS 



In their exultation over Spencer's partial failure, some of his 

 critics forget that the doctrine of Evolution was in his time, and 

 still is, in its infancy. When it is said, therefore, that Spencer's 

 disappointment on the score of Evolutionary Ethics was quite 

 inevitable* because in trying to saddle the natural process with 

 Ethics, i.e., conduct determined by conscious will, he was 

 " attempting the impossible," it is overlooked that Spenc 

 nevertheless remained quite hopeful about the eventual solutioi 

 of the then difficulties. There is nothing in Spencer's writing 

 to justify the temper customary even in scientific quarters whicl 

 makes men belittle every attempt in the direction of Evolutional 

 Ethics as a work of supererogation or as belonging to Theology 

 rather than to Science. Some have even gone so far as to 

 that there is a Science of Morals at all. Such failures and denials, 

 however, are all alike counsels of despair, as will be evident on 

 brief examination of the main difficulty. 



Without doubt the chief stumbling block has been the obscurity 

 anent " the mutual relations of organisms " a matter agai 

 and again insisted on by Darwin as of the utmost importance, 

 though yet one on which, according to him, " our ignorance 

 as yet profound." Obviously, as stated above, this matter oi 

 relatedness must involve the beginnings of Ethics ; and Darwin's 

 pronouncements on the subject ought not to have acted as 

 deterrent but rather as a spur to further investigation. 



Failing the knowledge concerning " mutual relations," th< 

 only certainty, according to Darwin's authority, is " Natun 

 Selection," based on " The Struggle for Existence." Had Darwii 

 possessed different facts, such as have since been ascertained, 

 to go upon, and in particular more light respecting " mutu< 

 relations," no doubt he would have presented us with a differenl 

 account of " The Origin of Species." Could it but have 

 shown that Symbiosis, i.e.,. useful co-operation, was at worl 

 from the very dawn of evolution, that, by augmenting divisioi 

 of labour and by enriching the protoplasm, it directly led t( 

 modifications of a permanently useful, i.e., successful order, 

 that it produced the indispensable groundwork for all abiding 

 physiological and psychological gains what a difference of 

 biological outlook this would have afforded him. Could it bul 

 have been shown that very many progressive variations are due 

 not to hazard but to useful work and to the capitalisation of its 



* PROF. H. H. SCULLARD, on Christian Ethics, Hibbert Journal, January, 1917. 



