THE ORIGIN OF MORALITY 61 



Many " biological " denials, it is to be feared, are merely the 

 expression of the difficulty adequately to include Economics 

 and Morals in a comprehensive system of " Qualitative 

 Biology." They are counsels of despair, as I have said in the 

 beginning. 



In further proof of my contentions, let us turn to Dr. Ch. 

 Mercier, who quite recently vouchsafed the following definition 

 of " function "* : " The duty, office, work or part that is 

 performed by an organ or tissue." 



Whence this " duty," we must ask, and what is its significance ? 

 And if " function " already implies conscientiousness, how can 

 life maintain itself for long without a conscience ? How can 

 there be such a thing as a " pure biology," i.e., alleged to exclude 

 morality, if the most important concept, the alpha and omega of 

 Biology, rests upon " duty " ? All health depends on " function," 

 and therefore, by definition, upon " duty " on " obedience," 

 or " integrity." Evolution itself, we must conclude, inasmuch 

 as it depends upon health, also greatly depends upon morality. 

 In short, no Biology can be complete without the recognition 

 of " the everlasting difference between right and wrong." 



It is thus becoming clear that the whole problem of evolution 

 variation, adaptation and heredity included turns on this : 

 How best to maintain useful industry and the commensurate 

 degrees of Bio-morality ? how best to maintain and to augment 

 fruitful partnerships!; how to perpetuate any new linkage that 

 has proved itself permanently availing in this double economic 

 sense and, hence, towards an ampler life ? Work and Symbiosis 

 are indeed the underlying realities, " variations " and " adapta- 

 tations," the resulting surface phenomena. Bio-morality, as 

 here depicted, thus leaves little to be desired as regards criteria 

 and sanctions. It is our own practice of morality which is so 

 often inconsistent and deficient, our mal-practices leading in turn 

 to wrong beliefs concerning " les volontes de la nature." 



Huxley apprehended a great truth only too truly when he 

 stated : " It is not to be forgotten that what we call rational 

 grounds for our beliefs are often extremely irrational attempts 

 to justify our instincts." 



Quite recently (24-3-17) a "correspondent" pointed out 



* Science Progress, October, 1916. 



t According to Geddes and Thomson, protoplasm itself is " an unusually fortunate com- 

 bination of partners, of inventive, organising, administrating, pushing, competitive and other 

 geniuses yet working in unity." 



