35 



ology; so we are told that a man "cannot avoid reflection" 

 and is therefore "compelled to compare the weaker impres- 

 sions 1 with the instinct of sympathy" which is always present. 

 In this word 'reflection* there is contained, then, something 

 which Darwin admits to be other than Natural Selection, 

 which is exactly the claim of the moralist. In this word is 

 involved ostensibly the intellectual appreciation of a situation, 

 not instinct driven on by a blind Natural Selection. Here the 

 situation is reversed. Instead of moral actions being the 

 result of a blind struggle 2 among instincts in which, according 

 to the working of Natural Selection, the strongest and most 

 abiding instinct wins out, man, as the 'reflecting being', 

 weighs, appreciates, "selects", apparently on his own account, 

 and consequently we find that the position which Darwin is 

 really expounding here, though apparently not altogether 

 aware of the fact, is similar to that of the 'domestic breeder', 

 whose method of conscious, purposive selection, Darwin, in 

 his ' Origin of Species ', contrasts with that of Natural Selection. 3 



Darwin's followers, however, have not always been as 

 generous as he in their acknowledgment of other factors than 

 that of Natural Selection as operative within the sphere of the 

 intellectual and moral. The principle of Natural Selection 

 has been vastly extended in its scope, and the tendency of 

 many later writers is to seek for an explanation of all the facts 

 of life, whether physical or mental, in its operation. But here 

 a number of difficult and interesting questions arise. Is it 

 true that Natural Selection is the factor to whose operation 

 we owe the existence of the morality to which we have attained? 

 a morality to which Darwin refers when speaking of actions 

 prompted by the instinct of sympathy. "Nor could we check 

 our sympathy," he says, "even at the urging of hard reason, 

 without deterioration in the noblest part of our nature. The 

 surgeon may harden himself while performing an operation, 

 for he knows that he is acting for the good of his patient; but 

 if we were intentionally to neglect the weak and helpless, it 

 could only be for a contingent benefit, with an overwhelming 

 evil." With reference to such a morality, are we justified in 

 stating that those in our society whom we believe to be the 

 morally fittest, are favoured above those who are not so morally 

 fit by the "unconscious", " non-teleologic " power of 

 Natural Selection? 



^hat is, past hunger, etc. See p. 31. 



'That is, void of "conscious intelligence", and "independent of reason. 1 

 See p. 30. 

 3 See p. 25. 



