THE UNFATHOMED UNIVERSE 19 



to tell us concerning the peacock's tail. Huxley's declara- 

 tion that the advance of science is synonymous with de- 

 scription in materialistic symbols, assumed too readily that 

 formulations which give Man a considerable power of predic- 

 tion and a considerable degree of practical control are there- 

 fore theoretically exhaustive. 



(g) But let us consider further limitations. We de- 

 scribe what goes on around us or within us in the simplest 

 possible terms, but the fundamental concepts we use are 

 notably in process of development. As Kirchhoff said, '' It 

 is thinkable that a description which to-day is the simplest 

 that can be given may in the further development of science 

 be replaced by one still more simple." It is also thinkable, 

 we may add, that some of our present-day formulations will 

 turn out to be too simple, for abstraction often leads to fal- 

 lacy. This at least is certain, that when we describe oc- 

 currences in terms of matter and energ}^, life and mind, or 

 any similar grand concepts, we are working with what can- 

 not be called self-explanatory. Every one of them is big 

 with mystery, though some are in process of simplification. 

 Much so-called ' explanation ' is reducing unusual unintel- 

 ligibility to order rather than to radical understanding. 

 No achievement in science has been more satisfactory than 

 the Law of Gravitation, but can any one tell what actually 

 happens in the unseen universe when the apple falls in the 

 orchard? In language which is a survival we still speak of 

 the force of gravity, the force of attraction, and so on, but 

 we know that forces as causes do not exist. The earth does 

 not pull the stone, the stone gravitates to the earth. Some 

 have proposed to speak of bodies ^ tractating ' and ^ pollat- 

 ing ' instead of saying that they attract or repel one another. 

 But, as Professor Soddy says, " Why two bodies tractate or 



