CONTINUITY APPLIED 169 



driven by the necessities of specialization to ignore the 

 supernatural in its inductions, but when physical scien- 

 tists deny the reality of the supernatural they forsake 

 their chosen specialty, and make speculative dogma- 

 tism do duty for ascertained facts. It is fully as 

 irrational for a natural scientist to deny that the super- 

 natural operates in history, as it is for the utilitarian 

 to deny that beauty exists. The issue is philosophical, 

 and is joined between naturalism and theism. It is 

 unscience, not science, that is opposed to behef in the 

 supernatural. 



Which is the most rational view of history, that 

 which discovers a sovereign mind ordering all things 

 according to a plan that cannot be defeated, or that 

 which interprets the higher by the lower, and accounts 

 for the evolution of things by a self-caused develop- 

 ment of non-intelHgent things into intelHgent makers 

 of history ? That is the question at issue. The world 

 was viewed by ancient Greek thought as a mechanical 

 cosmos, but by Hebrew writers as a drama or age. No' 

 doubt an adequate philosophy will regard both views 

 as partial truths. There is a vast mechanism in which 

 uniformity is in evidence; but, as Professor Huxley 

 frankly confesses, the mechanical aspect of things 

 does not of itself exclude the teleological.^ The world 

 is also a drama. Evolutionary thought requires em- 

 phasis upon this aspect. There is progress in things, 

 and progress means innovation. An endless cycle 

 continually returns upon itself. It reaches no goal and 



1 Darwiniana, pp. 109-114. 



