APRIL 21, 1923] 




















contrary, the biological doctrine then becomes a de- 
scription of the way in which Spirit has worked ; and, 
by interpreting it, we get an understanding of the nature 
of spiritual reality. By tacitly opposing Nature and 
Spirit the professor finds it difficult to resist the con- 
clusion that “the original and primal is the real.” 
_ But if we are convinced that the process “ from nebula 
to man” reveals Spirit working in time, we shall see, 
in Nature, degrees of reality which have successively 
emerged, the last being the consciousness of civilised 
man. 
How can we meet the contention that there is no 
such reality as Spirit? We answer that the funda- 
mental objection to the naturalism, which Prof. Wood 
_ terms science-theology, is that it is inconsistent with 
itself. It makes spiritual judgments while denying 
"spiritual reality. Science, within its proper sphere, is 
“quantitative. In it the mind abstracts those aspects 
of Nature which can be measured. But then the mind 
forms scientific concepts ‘“‘in which the phenomena 
_ given in perception attain to a higher degree of coher- 
~ ence and of truth.” We prize these concepts because 
of their truth-value. But value-judgments belong to 
‘the world of spirit, to a kind of existence to which 
‘merely numerical categories do not apply. To the 
same spiritual world such qualities as justice and 
virtue belong. Strictly speaking, they lie outside the 
realm of natural science. Men of science are always, 
often unconsciously, interpreting their results by means 
of value-judgments. Such a phrase as “ the survival 
_of the fittest ’’ is a well-known example of this process. 
For the explanation of a thing or an event we have to 
use what is above it in the scales of existence or value. 
Yet, in spite of this, men of science who are constantly 
_ studying properties of matter, living or dead, jump to 
the metaphysical conclusion that matter is ultimate 
reality. The legitimate conclusion is rather that ulti- 
_ mate reality is spiritual, and that goodness and beauty, 
like truth, reveal its nature. 
The relation of matter to spirit continues to perplex 
us. But the tendency of modern physics is increasingly 
to reduce matter to a mere metaphysical abstraction, 
like the ether, which is the subject of energy. Some 
physicists appear to regard matter as nothing but a form 
of energy. But neither view will allow us to regard the 
universe as a self-acting machine, for in such a con- 
ception mind can have no place. Moreover, as soon 
as natural science ceases to be merely descriptive, the 
idea of causation enters in. We cannot explain cause 
unless we admit creative action working towards a 
definite end, so that the laws of Nature express the 
uniform mode of action of a Supreme Will. The 
doctrine of evolution indicates the purpose of that 
Will, for it asserts that earth’s life-process has led to 
NO. 2790, VOL. 111] 
NATURE 
527 
man, whose conscience tells him that he must be loyal 
to absolute values external to himself. God, in short, 
reveals His own nature in the highest faculties of 
humanity. 
It cannot, we think, be fairly argued that belief in 
evolution destroys the Christian hope of eternal life. 
That hope rests ultimately. upon belief in “ the conserva- 
tion of values,’ upon a conviction that the attributes 
of God are eternal with Him. We now know enough 
of the universe to be sure that within a measurable 
period life upon this earth will come to an end, All 
humanity’s spiritual achievements will then perish 
unless there is a Kingdom of Heaven where they are 
eternally preserved. Among such achievements the 
perfecting of personality ranks highest. It is difficult 
to conceive either of timeless existence or of a perfect 
human soul; but the reasonableness of our hope of 
eternal life is not thereby destroyed. Significantly 
Christianity connects belief in human immortality 
with its doctrine of the Incarnation, its affirmation that, 
in a perfect Man, God has actually been revealed. 
We can do no more than hint at our reasons for dis- 
agreeing with Prof. Wood’s point of view. But, because 
we have criticised his views, we would commend his 
honesty, his freedom from bigotry, and the high seri- 
ousness of his aim. The problems which have engaged 
his attention are as difficult as they are vital. It is 
probable that humanity will never solve them com- 
pletely ; it is certain that now we can but see “as in 
a glass darkly.” E. W. Barnes. 



A Peruvian Desert. 
Geology of the Tertiary and Quaternary Periods in the 
North-west Part of Peru. By Dr. T. O. Bosworth. 
With an Account of the Paleontology by H. Woods, 
Dr. T. W. Vaughan, Dr. J. A. Cushman, and others. 
Pp. xxii+434. (London: Macmillan and Co., Ltd., 
1922.) I. 5s. net. 
HERE are few contributions to geological science, 
aT published in recent years, of greater value than 
this description of some three thousand square miles 
of the littoral! of northern Peru. 
Dr. Bosworth, who was formerly in the British 
Geological Survey, was still a young man when he left 
it to take up economic work, but he had already made 
himself a name for sound and original geological 
research. The present publication is not the result 
of a rapid traverse of the area with which it deals, 
but is the fruit of several years of exploration, reinforced 
by detailed surveys in many places and numerous 
borings for oil, in which the characters of the strata 
traversed were carefully observed. Dr. Bosworth has 
