74 FROM COMTE TO BENJAMIN KIDD PART n 



to admit this, viz. as a source of variations. But he 

 has never formulated a theory of the cause of varia- 

 tions. He is content, as we observed, to treat them 

 as casual. That, however, cannot mean that they 

 are uncaused, or that the uniformity of nature breaks 

 down as we approach microscopic cell processes. 

 Perhaps at the utmost we can justify the phrase by 

 taking it to mean that congenital variations from 

 the parental qualities are neither on the average 

 advantageous to the species, which might be re- 

 pudiated as a somewhat strong teleological doctrine, 

 nor yet disadvantageous to the species, a view which 

 would imply a sort of dysteleology, as if we lived in 

 the devil's world, and evolution had to go on with 

 a dead heave in spite of the recalcitrance of nature. 

 Chance or accident in common language means " not 

 purposed," and it may perhaps be fair to call varia- 

 tions " casual," if they stand on the average neutral 

 to the purpose or end of the species, viz. to survive 

 and propagate itself. Still the epithet used without 

 analysis is rather slovenly, and any thinking which 

 is fairly summarised by the use of that epithet must 

 be regarded as rather slovenly too. Or, if we hesi- 

 tate to say this of Darwin, we may at least affirm 

 that he left much ground for subsequent investiga- 

 tion. He concerned himself but little with the laws 

 determining variation. There were variations ; there 

 were candidates of varying degrees of merit. Get 

 me candidates, he said in effect; I will give you an 

 examiner who, however tedious in method, is in the 

 long run unerringly wise. Nature will select, come 

 the variations how they may. At times, as we have 

 said, Darwin seems willing to accept Lamarck's 



