148 SECTIONAL ADDRESSES. 
Be that as it may, there is clearly nothing in the foregoing thesis 
which necessarily precludes the further consideration of the same events 
from the point of view of Creative Evolution. The questions: What 
makes emergents emerge? What directs the whole course of emergent 
evolution ?—these questions and their like are there quite in place. 
Furthermore, as between emergent thesis and Creative antithesis, Kant’s 
‘ Solution of the Third Antinomy ’ may afford a guiding clue. 
If one selects, as above, certain salient phases of evolutionary pro- 
gress, and lays stress upon them, one must remember that within the 
span of each phase there are other emergent sub-phases, some of them, 
no doubt, worthy of selective emphasis. Nay more, it must be realised 
that one is only attempting to classify the myriad instances of emergence 
in an ascending hierarchy. In all phases, in all sub-phases, and in all 
the myriad instances, there is continuity of advance, in that (a) there 
is never any unfilled gap or hiatus in the course of events, and in that 
(b) any instance, sub-phase, or phase, arises out of, is founded on, 
and implies, that which lies just below it in the scale. 
Here, however, an important question arises. The selected sequence 
of qualities is— 
(4) Conscious. 
(3) Vital. 
(2) Chemical. 
(1) Physical. 
Are the four terms of this sequential order homogeneous? If so, the 
quality of consciousness in (4) is homogeneous with the purely physical 
quality under (1). But this is not in accordance with a cardinal tenet 
very widely accepted—namely, that the physical and the mental cannot 
be regarded as homogeneous. They are, it is urged, essentially hetero- 
geneous. On the assumption (which I feel bound to accept) that this 
traditional view is right, how does emergent evolution deal with the 
problem? It further assumes (or accepts as an hypothesis to be tried 
out on its merits) that there obtains a correlation of diverse (and in that 
sense heterogeneous) aspects. The word ‘correlation’ is here used to 
designate a mode of natural ‘ gotogetherness ’ which is swt generis; and 
the word ‘ aspects’ (for lack of a better) to designate the fundamental 
difference between the mental or psychical and the non-mental or 
physical—a difference that must be accepted as something given in 
nature. On this hypothesis, then, how do our emergent phases now 
run? 
Let me recall that each of our four emergent stages gives emphasis 
to a salient phase of emergence, and that within each phase there are 
sub-phases also emergent through the supervenience of something really 
new. Within the vital quality, for example, there are ascending sub- 
qualities. It is for the physiologist to deal with these. There are, too, 
in any given organism different lines of advance closely inter-related 
within the life-system of that organism as a whole. We must select, 
then, that line of advance which serves to enable us to interpret 
psychical advance in terms of correlation. Here we may be content, 
so far as the physiological aspect is concerned, to label, say, three sub- 
phases (a), (b), and (c); where (c) represents such integration as is 
