36 



With reference to the first question, it is at all events clear 

 that Darwin did not give an unqualified affirmative. In dis- 

 cussing this issue Thomas Huxley draws a clearer line even 

 than Darwin between the operation of Natural Selection and 

 that of conscious or purposive selection, at the same time con- 

 fessing his inability to foresee any other outcome than an irre- 

 concilable opposition between these two factors. The con- 

 scious selection of man must strive against the ' cosmic process'. 

 And he concludes: "Fragile reed, as he may be, man, as Pascal 

 says, is a thinking reed; there lies within him a fund of energy, 

 operating intelligently and so far akin to that which pervades 

 the universe that it is competent to influence and modify the 

 cosmic process. In virtue of his intelligence, the dwarf bends 

 the Titan to his will." 1 From this standpoint, then, it will be 

 clear that Natural Selection, and 'survival of the fittest' 

 (morally considered) are antagonistic processes, and that con- 

 scious selection is the fact according to which man's life is 

 governed. 



Nietzsche, on the other hand, appears to favour the 

 dominance of the biological principle of Natural Selection, 

 as applied within the realm of morals, maintaining the view, 

 according to Sorley, "that the principles of biological develop- 

 ment (variation, that is to say, and Natural Selection) should 

 be allowed free play, so that in the future, as in the past, suc- 

 cessful variations may be struck out by triumphant egoism". 2 

 Although Darwin contended that we could not check the 

 sympathy which has given rise to the 'accepted morality', 

 "even at the urging of hard reason, without deterioration in 

 the noblest part of our nature," 3 yet it seems otherwise with 

 Neitzsche, who looks upon such morality (for example, the 

 Christian morality, emphasizing as it does, benevolence, 

 humility, etc.) in consequence of its departure from the 'sur- 

 vival of the fittest' method of Natural Selection, as a develop- 

 ment in the wrong direction 4 a development of the 'servile' 

 as contrasted with the ' noble ' morality. 



However, in whatever direction the development of our 

 morality may have been, whether according to Huxley it was 

 by opposing the cosmic process, or according to Nietzsche, by 

 giving Natural Selection free play, it is evident that such 

 development has been the result of conscious selection. 



'Thos. H. Huxley, "Romanes Lecture", 1893, "Evolution and Ethics" 

 Macmillan & Co., p. 35. 

 2 W.R. Sorley, "Recer 

 )04, p. 51. 



'"The Descent of Mai. , ,*. ., KK . iw -.,. 

 4 Fr. Nietzsche, " Morgenrothe ", Leipzig, 1900, p. 



2 W. R. Sorley, "Recent Tendencies in Ethics", Wm. Blackwood & Sons 

 1904, p. 51. 



'"The Descent of Man", Vol. I, pp. 168-9. 



