THE LIMITS OF EVOLUTION 49 



that constitutes the core of intelligence, another com- 

 ponent. This other component, which Kant named 

 " sensation," to mark the fact that it expresses some- 

 thing insufficient in us, something which must be 

 supplemented to us by reception ^ from what is not 

 ourselves, is best interpreted as a limit which points 

 to the cooperation ^ of some other noumenal being 

 with men and other conscious centres. But when 

 once the conditioning relation is shown to exist from 

 man toward Nature, as the scene of evolution, instead 

 of from Nature toward man ; when once it is seen — 

 as Huxley, the protagonist of evolution, at last came 

 so clearly, if so unawares, to imply ^ — that in Con- 

 science at least, the ideal of Righteousness, man has 

 that which no cosmic process can possibly account for, 

 but to which, rather, the cosmic process presents an 

 aspect of unmistakable antagonism, then our way will 

 come open to determine the cooperating Noumenon, 

 the Supreme Reality, as also having this higher 

 human nature, as having it in its ideal perfection, and 



^The reader should beware not to interpret these terms " reception " 

 and " cooperation " literally , that is, in the hght of ordinary natural or 

 efficient causation only, as it is our bad uncritical habit to do. Their 

 genuine interpretation must be by means of final cause. But see the 

 essay on " The Harmony of Determinism and P'reedom," pp. 332-351. 



^ See his Romanes Lecture on " Evolution and Ethics," in his Col- 

 lided Essays, vol. ix ; especially pp. 79-84, and Note 20. In these 

 pages and in this Note, their great author holds out for the inclusion of 

 Conscience, in some va^uc way, in the evolutional process as a whole; 

 but he has demonstrated an antagonism that is fatal to the hypothesis. 



