THE ORIGIN OF MAN 257 



In either case there is no foundation in instinct for 

 morality. Intelligence and freedom of choice alone, 

 and not blind instinct, give moral quality to conduct. 

 It is evident that the word ought is used in a highly 

 " figurative sense " when applied to the instinct of a 

 hound to hunt. 



The failure of the hound to hunt awakens no 

 pangs of conscience. Conscience and instinct stand 

 widely apart. The exercise of the former demands 

 the use of the highest mental powers, while the 

 action of pure instinct is independent of such powers. 



Instinct may exist forever, as it has existed in all 

 animals, without giving birth to conscience. I see 

 no probable method of transition from the former to 

 the latter. To call the moral faculty in man an in- 

 stinct is not to show how it can be evolved from the 

 instincts of animals. 



The great gulf between the moral nature of man 

 and the instincts of animals remains unbridged. I 

 quote again what Darwin has said: " A moral being 

 is one who is capable of comparing his past and 

 future actions or motives, and of approving or disap- 

 proving of them. We have no reason to suppose 

 that any of the lower animals have this capacity." 



Nor do we have reason to suppose that the infinite 

 chasm between man's moral and intellectual nature 

 and the capacity of the highest animals could ever 

 have been bridged by the process of evolution. Mr. 

 Darwin's admissions, in speaking of the evolution of 

 man's high powers, are sufficient to show the weakness 

 of the evidence on which he relies. 



Keason, the power to compare ideas and draw con- 

 clusions, the power to think about our past and pres- 

 ent mental conditions, the power to form abstract 

 ideas, the use of language, conscience, faith, hope 

 and disinterested love — love for country, for human- 



17 



