THEISTIC AND ATHEISTIC EVOLUTION 35 



Let us now consider more closely the interior laws 

 of evolution in the organic world. The monists 

 maintain such ' inexplicable ' laws to be superfluous. 

 But if we assume no more than that the living 

 substance possesses a capacity of reaction, when ex- 

 posed to external stimulus, we are at once confronted 

 with the principle of expediency r , which cannot be 

 further explained (by monists), because the idea of 

 purpose or design is inseparable from it. 



I wish to emphasise this statement. In proto- 

 plasm the faculty of reacting conformably to an 

 end implies the existence of an intrinsic law of 

 evolution. Such a law is the interior laws of evolu- 

 tion are inseparable from the idea of capacity on the 

 part of the protoplasm to react in accordance with 

 expediency. These laws are absolutely indispens- 

 able, because we cannot imagine a living proto- 

 plasm devoid of the vital purpose expressed in the 

 processes of growth, nutrition, and propagation. 



It would, however, be a mistake to regard the 

 interior laws of evolution, which the theistic theory 

 of life assumes as the chief principle underlying 

 the evolution of the organic world, as a sort of 

 clockwork, wound up once for all, and left to run 

 down. We must not assume the existence of any 

 6 pre-established harmony ' between an organism and 

 the world around it ; no, it is rather reciprocal 

 action and the disposition to reciprocal action, 

 which allows the interior and exterior factors in 

 evolution to work together. When people speak of 



