72 SYMBIOSIS 



reciprocal and quasi-economical processes, such as those by 

 which the simplest elements are held together in protoplasm. 

 Instead of positing, however, as a correlate of such a view, a purely 

 teleological order of Nature, as others have done, we shall merely 

 say that the apparent " preparation " of the life-elements for 

 " ultimate purposes " amounted to this : that all equilibria, 

 systems or unions, came by their" properties and permanence 

 through serviceableness, i.e., in proportion as they availed towards 

 life in the cosmic scheme of things. The wonderful properties 

 of the elements, so we shall argue, are the expression of their 

 wide, cosmo- and bio-economic usefulness acquired during 

 milleniums of exercise and application in cosmic service, when 

 they " learned " that they must do unto " others " what they 

 wished others to do unto them, i.e., to be of service, or, at any 

 rate, in Kant's terminology, to act according to "maxims " 

 which in the interest of all alike, required to be universal] sed, 

 i.e., according to " duty," in the cosmic sense of the word. The 

 superficial thinker would see only selfish and purely subjective 

 interests at play in the case of, say, an animal attracted by a 

 seed or a luscious fruit, which it forthwith " devours." It is 

 precisely in pursuance of their selfish interests, so he would say, 

 that animals have developed their peculiar and " grasping " 

 mentality, which differentiates them so pronouncedly from the 

 meek flower. 



But the case is not so superficial as this. Had it not been for 

 the operation of primordial forms of Symbiosis and the capital 

 and momenta thereby established, the useful differentiation 

 between plant and animal, as we know it to-day, and the con- 

 comitant bio-economic exchange of substances and services 

 between the " kingdoms," would never have been possible. 

 A common descent, protoplasmic kinship, ever renewed by 

 continuous Symbiosis, and a persistent common cause, these are 

 the powerful and perennial forces behind the mutual " interest," 

 the mutual " appeal " and the mutual stimulation between 

 plant and animal. Wherever we find latent possibilities of 

 " appeal " and in especial of " lively " interaction, we may 

 conclude that they are similarly to be accounted for by previous 

 history and by correlated evolution. 



The superficial thinker overlooks these important data and 

 the further fact that, in the normal growth of biological mutual- 

 ity, a kind of collective usefulness has become operative. The 



