96 PRESENT-DAY RATIONALISM 



poses some opponent — it might be a Monist of to-day — 

 to argue that "there existed in things a principle of order, 

 which had disposed the parts of the watch into their 

 present form and situation ; " but as Paley observes, it is 

 inconceivable for a man at least to conceive of a principle 

 of order " distinct from the intelligence of the watch- 

 maker ". Darwinism, however, does not even admit such 

 an hypothesis of a " principle of order". The mechanism 

 of an animal, far more profoundly complex than a watch, 

 is supposed to have been evolved by "chance improve- 

 ments " occurring over immensely long periods ; but the 

 more the ininiiti(B of living beings are studied, the more 

 inconceivable is it that such a process could be effective. 

 As an example, I will here quote Paley's observations on 

 the structure of the eye and leave it to the reader's judg- 

 ment to decide which is the more probable hypothesis, 

 that all the adjustments have been developed together, 

 in response to the external stimulus, that being, in the 

 case of the eye, simply, light, to which the protoplasm 

 responds, and builds up the necessary tissues under that 

 mysterious Directivity already spoken of — or, as accord- 

 ing to Darwin, each of the details appeared as a chance 

 favourable variety, to wait for improvement till another 

 chance favourable variety should appear, and so on and 

 so on till that most elaborate structure in its entirety 

 might be perfected. 



Paley thus begins chapter vi. on "The Argument 

 Cumulative " : " Were there no example in the world, of 

 contrivance, except that of the eye, it would be alone 

 sufficient to support the conclusion which we draw from 

 it, as to the necessity of an intelligent Creator. It could 

 never be got rid of, because it could not be accounted for 

 by any other supposition, which did not contradict all the 

 principles we possess of knowledge ; the principles ac- 



