EVOLUTIONARY TELEOLOGY. ;>75 



may be attributed. The error, as we suppose, lies in 

 the combination of the principle of design with tlie 

 hypothesis of the immutability and isolated creation of 

 species. The latter hypothesis, in its nature unprov- 

 able, has, on scientific grounds, become so far im- 

 probable that few, even of the anti-Darwinian natu- 

 ralists, now hold to it ; and, whatever may once have 

 been its religious claims, it is at present a hinderance 

 rather than a help to any just and consistent teleology. 



By the adoption of the Darwinian hypothesis, or 

 something like it, which we incline to favor, many of 

 the difficulties are obviated, and others diminished. 

 In the comprehensive and far-reaching teleology 

 which may take the place of the former narrow con- 

 ceptions, organs and even faculties, useless to the 

 individual, find their explanation and reason of l;)eing. 

 Either they have done service in the past, or they 

 may do service in the future. They may have been 

 essentially useful in one way in a past species, and, 

 though now functionless, they may be turned to use- 

 ful account in some very different way hereafter. In 

 botany several cases come to our mind which suggest 

 such interpretation. 



Under this view, moreover, waste of life and ma- 

 terial in organic Nature ceases to be utterly inexpli- 

 cable, because it ceases to be objectless. It is seen 

 to be a part of the general " economy of ISTature," a 

 phrase which has a real meaning. One good illustra- 

 tion of it is furnished by the pollen of ilowers. The 

 seeming waste of this in a pine-forest is enormous. 

 It gives rise to the so-called " showers of sul])]uir,'' 

 which every one has heard of. Myriads upon myri- 



