ON FINAL CAUSE. 271 



I think that, even if we admit all the evolutionists lay claim to, nevertheless 

 the teleo ooical argunient-that of a final cause for the existence of a rational 

 and intelligent Creator-still remains unanswered. Evolution only accounts 

 tor the existence of the universe as a going machine, successive generations 

 and variations being continually produced, and those generations being per- 

 petuated in a manner beneficial to the creatures generated. I say, admittinrr 

 all this as an explanation of the natural history of the universe, it still fails to 

 exclude the teleological argument that the creatures which exist must have 

 had the power of variation bestovved upon them. The creature is put into 

 an environment which enables it to fulfil its functions and to brine, about 

 the results we witness ; but all this implies design and purpose. It Is what 

 could not have occurred by chance or accident. Therefore I think 

 material evolution does not militate against the belief we ' entertain' 

 and that it is rational to entertain, as to the universe having been created 

 by a God who had in view the perfection of the creatures by which 

 It IS inhabited. Evolution is to be regarded simply as one of the means 

 by which this perfection and improvement have been brought about. In 

 pomt of fact, the whole argument brought by the evolutionists against 

 theism, seems to me very like the old illustration which, in accounting 

 lor the movement of a watch, went back to the spring and left the oriaii"; 

 of that part of the machinery unexplained. These scientific theori^'sts 

 attempt to explain the existence of the universe without a Creator They 

 merely explain some of the processes, but fail altogether to touch their 

 origin. It IS a very remarkable thing how completely all the eflbrts of human 

 science have foiled to explain the origin of anything. Professor Max Miiller 

 has pointed out that all the attempts to explain the beginning of any lano-uaae 

 have utterly failed, and that there is not the slightest prospect of our obtain- 

 ing such knowledge. He adds the remark, that the human intellect seems 

 equally to fail in ascertaining the beginning of everything else. Therefore 

 I cannot think that the argument for evolution- although I admit evolution 

 to be true as far as it accounts for a considerable number of steps in the 

 process by which the creatures of the universe have been improved— does 

 dispose of the teleological argument for a final cause, which the author of 

 this paper has put before us in so admirable a manner. 



Mr. Dent.-I should like to ask the last speaker whether he accounts for 

 the appearance of man by evolution ? 



Eev J White.- I fear I am misunderstood. I only say, supposing the 

 case of the evolutionist to be admitted, still it does not militate against, nor 

 upset, the argument advanced in the paper. 



Captain Francis Petrie (Hon. Sec.).-I have received the followino- 

 communication from Surgeon-General C. A. Gordon, M.D., C.B., who is 

 unavoidably prevented from being present. 



Physical causes are the real proximate producers of all phenomena, sec. 4. 

 But the fact that they are so leaves the idtimate muse of those phenomena 

 unexplained. For example, a match applied to gunpowder is the immediate 

 VOL, XX. U 



