280 PKOF. G. MACLOSKIE, D.SC; LL.D., ON 



Many attempts have been made to banish from science the 

 consideration of teleology, or purpose in nature. Investigators 

 were afraid to employ teleological language, and whenever 

 they drifted into it, they soon backed out, apologising for its 

 momentary use. Their shyness has often prejudiced their 

 work, for as Gassendi said long ago (with the case of Harvey's 

 teleological work on the circulation of the blood fresh in his 

 mind), " the final cause often leads t(j the discovery of the 

 efficient cause." Now, however, the advance of the mecha- 

 nical view is forcing teleology upon our attention ; for if the 

 universe is a machine, it is by the same reasoning known to 

 be a complexity of sub-machines, every one of which has its 

 own purpose to serve. Hence we find Sachs, who has done 

 more than any other man to apply the mechanical theory in 

 botany, and who is not hide-bound by theology, pleading for 

 the right to use the word piirjwse, calling it '• a word which 

 many fanatics of the theory of descent would, if possible, banish 

 from our language," and adding that the Avhole of physiology 

 is taken up with such questions. (Sn.chs' Lectures on the 

 Physiology of Plants, Lect. I.) Huxley has made the dis- 

 covery that physiological phenomena can be expressed in 

 the language of teleology. (Huxley on llie Crayfish, p. Vol.) 

 And though, like Sachs, he falls short of the theistic sigi)ifi- 

 cancy of this, he has more recently stated (in the chapter he 

 contributes to the Life of Charles Darioin), that whilst Darwin- 

 ism abolishes the commoner and coarser forms of teleology, 

 it really reconciles teleology and morphology. In this sen- 

 tence he adopts (perhaps unwittingly) the beautiful expres- 

 sion by which Asa Gray showed at once his Darwinism and 

 his faith, viz., " Let us recognise Darwin's great service to 

 natural science in bringing back to it Teleology, so that 

 instead of Moi-phology versus Teleology, we shall have 

 Morphology Avedded to Teleology." (Asa Gray, Letter in 

 Nature, June 4, 1874.) Weismann argues in his Studies of 

 Descent, that the mechanical conception of nature favours 

 teleology, thus, " The harmony of the universe, and of that 

 part of it which we call organic nature cannot be explained 

 by chance. Mechanism and Teleology do not exclude each 

 other, but are rather in mutual agreement. Without Teleo- 

 logy there could be no mechanism, but only a confusion of 

 crude forces; without mechanism there could be no Teleo- 

 logy, for how could the latter otherwise effect its purpose ? " 

 And quoting Von Hartman he says that, "the most complete 

 mechanism conceivable is likewise the most completely con- 



