148 HAS SCIENCE DISCOVERED GOD? 



physical science in the light of its study of the inor- 

 ganic realm, especially in that the laws of physical 

 science make no reference to the future course of 

 events and are, in that sense, mechanistic; whereas 

 the activities of mind can be expressed only in teleo- 

 logical laws, laws which necessarily and inevitably, 

 refer to the future; in other words and objectively, 

 all mentally controlled processes are teleological, in- 

 volve a form of causation in which some mental ref- 

 erence to the future plays an essential part, whereas 

 physical causation seems to imply no such factor. 



Psychology, then, in my view, affords convincing 

 evidence of the reality and efficacy of Mind in Nature: 

 and it affords strong, though not conclusive, evidence 

 that mental organization is not wholly dependent upon 

 the physical structure of the human organism. Sup- 

 pose these indications to be confirmed, leaving no 

 room for doubt: — ^What, if any, would be their bear- 

 ing on the problem of theism? So far as I can see, 

 the bearing would be what I would call permissive 

 only. Demonstration of the reality and of the causal 

 efficacy in Nature of Mind or Spirit (as we know it in 

 ourselves) and of its relative (at least) independence 

 of the physical realm, would give countenance to the 

 assumption of Mind or Spirit existing and operating 

 on a vaster scale of influence and of efficacy of direc- 

 tive and creative power; and that, I take it, is the fun- 

 damental assumption of all Theism. But It would not 

 in itself amount to proof or even to evidence of the 

 truth of this assumption. 



Another preliminary question must be briefly dealt 

 with. It is widely held that psychology shows that, 

 man being what he is, the development of theistic be- 



