LITERATURE AND SCIENCE 
of the universe circulate and pull together, he found 
no similitude so true as that of the tree. “Beauti- 
ful, altogether beautiful and great,” said he. “The 
Machine of the universe — alas! to think of that in 
contrast!” 
Carlyle was a poet and a prophet and saw the 
world through his moral and spiritual nature, and 
not through his logical faculties. He revolted at the 
conception of the mystery we name life being the 
outcome of physical and chemical forces alone. 
Literature, art, and religion are not only not fos- 
tered by the scientific spirit, but this spirit, it seems 
to me, is almost fatal to them, at least so far as it 
banishes mystery and illusion, and checks or inhibits 
our anthropomorphic tendencies. Literature and 
art have their genesis in love, joy, admiration, spec- 
ulation, and not in the exact knowledge which is the 
foundation of science. Our creative faculties may 
profit by exact knowledge of material things, but 
they can hardly be inspired by it. Inspiration is 
from within, but scientific knowledge is from 
without. 
There is no literature or art without love and con- 
templation. We can make literature out of science 
only when we descend upon it with love, or with 
some degree of emotional enjoyment. Natural his- 
tory, geology, biology, astronomy, yield literary ma- 
terial only to the man of emotion and imagination. 
Into the material gathered from outward nature 
183 
