IN MODERN SCIENCE. 



n 



demanded on the one hypothesis, scarcely 

 differs from the conception of an intelligent 

 Creator demanded on the other, while it is, to 

 say the least, equally incomprehensible. It is, 

 besides, objectionable to science, on the ground 

 that it requires us to assume properties in 

 matter and energy quite at variance with the 

 results of experience. The remarkable alter- 

 native presented by Tyndall in his Belfast Ad- 

 dress well expresses this : " Either let us open 

 our doors freely to the conception of creative 

 acts, or, abandoning them, let us radically 

 change our notions of matter." The expres- 

 sion "creative acts" here is a loose and not 

 very accurate one for the operation of creative 

 power. The radical change in " our notions of 

 matter" involves an entire reversal of all that 

 science knows of its essential properties. This 

 being understood, the sentence is a fair expres- 

 sion oi the dilemma in which the agnostic and 

 the materialist find themselves. 



Between the two hypotheses above stated 

 there is, howe' er, one material and vital dif- 

 ference, depending on the nature of man him- 

 self. The universe does not consist merely of 

 insensate matter and force and automatic vital- 

 ity ; there happens to be in it the rational and 



